Jesus

[Abiyoyo]

Why Jesus? Why does He have to be the one of many, or the one that lied? The one mocked, ridiculed, smuged, into this character of fictional being. Why does He have to be the one that didnt exist, or existed but made to seem as if He were a conn artist? Why does He have to be the one who didnt do it exactly like everyone wanted, or in the ways we want to see it, with our deep allknowing mindsets?

 

I mean, give the guy a break. Seriously. If He did exist, then He was the closest thing to the Messiah yet, and has affected millions of people even up until today. Thats a fact. He has supplied the insight and surroundings, from His teachings; that I truly believe have let America be the mighty country it is today.

 

Ok. Lets flip that and say that most of political, structured America we have today, and our mighty status, has nothing to do with Jesus. Hypothetically speaking for those that would conclude that He had nothing to do with any of the entirity of the influencial level of those that formed and molded America.

 

So, on the above thought. Again. Why Jesus? Sounds right to me, from the Ot God. The Ot God, though through different aspects fixated on death, was (Biblically) very detailed, directive, and institutional to His people. I was really thinking about all the times the Ot God did this and that in great anger toward Israel. A few examples are the wilderness, David and his numbering, worshiping of Idols, and different others that God catorgorized as an abomination.

 

So here is this God that has killed many of Israel, let them kill their own selves in disobedience, punished them, starved them, took things away from them, tested them, let them just basically desinagrate into this lump of nothing of people. He gave them Moses, Samuel; then the people wanted a king. So He gave them Saul, then Judges, and rulers, breaking them up.

 

Lastly, upon their own political heads of disobedience; He sent prophets to warn them and try to get them to listen and direct them to repent; as God even in the Ot has never once cut one of His off in anger upon genuine repentance. Anyway, they didnt and even tryed to kill the prophets. Then God brought this guy around, whom descent isnt even tracable, Elijah with much power ; more so than Samuel, David, or any of the other prophets or kings since Moses. He killed like 450 False prophets that worshipped Baael.

 

Still not listening and taking heed of things, of any of the prophets until the day they were trampled upon; and taking into exile. Now heres the kicker( hear me out). All that, and God still gives them another opportunity, to actually live and follow the ordinaces He had set from Moses till then. Whether the debatable Daniel is real or not, makes no mind; God let them try to rebuild, even sending another strong, Samuel type to lead them, him being astonished at there sins. Why didnt God smote them right then? When Ezra came along, God had once again gave them a plan, direction, and a leader; whom they where attentive to this time.

 

Now from that point until Jesus's time. theres a little gap, Biblically. In all assumtion that since the decree of the Jews, was that, a decree from a mighty king; they were in conjunction to some extent with the unreligious, governmental base of that region. Yet they could do what they wished as far as worship.

 

I you jump to Jesus's time; you see that the people again became comfortable and molding right back into the same Isarel( in essence) that got them carried away in exile the first time.

 

My thought is maybe God intended to let Jesus be just the person that He was so that way if one choose to seek God genuinely no matter what, never forsaking Him; Jesus would be the one that set the guidlines and structure from that point on. Jesus said He came to fulfill the law, and He also said that not one bit of the law will go away; in which it hasnt. Yet, Jesus said that the kingdom is inside of us. That this Holy Spirit will guide us and direct us into all truths. Lastly, Jesus claimed that He was before anything, with the Father; and through Him is everlasting life. Of course, since He is directly in the same sphere of God as He proclaimed to be; He would indeed in that case be the way to God.

 

So for thats the nutshell overall veiw of what happened; and this is what my thought is geared toward. If God already knowing all these things were going to happen and this world would become what is now today; wouldnt it make sense that this relentless, ever trying to intervene for His people, God, sent a Man to claim heritage and authenticity of the Ot gods true Divinity and direction.

 

Yes, God in the Ot did many weird things, that didnt fit the Jesus charater; but also God in the Ot did these things to a stubborn people that carried His name around, as ordaned and Holy. At the point of Jesus; it seems God( already knowing the growth and discovery from mankind thousands of years later) wanted to send someone in a certain way to be a Light unto all peoples; not just His stubborn Jews.

 

That in all drives me to this question. Is Jesus the true, divinity breaker. Its not Jesus that is important here; its what God wanted to accomplish through Jesus.

 

My point is that just like in Samuels, Davids, Moses day; God wants His people to love Him with all their heart mind and soul. They did, yet people still did as they pleased; then God letting them have there ways, let them. Now with Jesus's introduction, there is a different way to the father; other than taking your Son up a mountain to kill him, striking a rock and water spilling out, parting the red sea, being taking up in a whirlwind, miracles being performed.

 

All you have to do is believe on His Son; by the same faith that all these feats and miracles were performed.

[Guest Shiva H. Vishnu]

Huh?

[Fweethawt]

We told you to lay off the crack, YoYo.

 

But nooooooo, you wouldn't listen.

[mwc]

I mean, give the guy a break. Seriously. If He did exist, then He was the closest thing to the Messiah yet, and has affected millions of people even up until today. Thats a fact.

Okay, let's assume for a second he did exist. Now, as I already pointed out to you in another thread, the Messiah is a warrior, not a priest/healer/dead guy, so I'm not giving jesus a break as he was nothing like a Messiah.

 

Second, I'm going to say this in a way that I hope you can understand once and for all. There has already been a Messiah. His name was Cyrus the Great (Cyrus II). He allowed the return of the Jews from Babylon.

 

Here's just one source for this material http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp...1&letter=C:

 

The very fact that Yhwh had carried out His prophecy in a wholly unexpected manner, by choosing a pagan to overthrow the idols of the nations, so that He alone might be acknowledged as the only true God, was accepted by the second Isaiah as the surest evidence of the divine government. This prophet, Cyrus, through whom were to be redeemed His chosen people, whom He would glorify before all the world, was the promised Messiah, "the Shepherd of Yhwh" (xliv. 28, xlv. 1).

 

[emphasis mine]

 

Don't trust me when I say there are many more...look it up...look them all up and then drill it into your stupid fucking mind. There has already been a god damned Messiah declared by the Jews and written into the bible that you love and read and practically worship and walking on this fucking planet over 500 fucking years before your stupid failed god-man! Get it?

 

So get it straight. Quit jumping threads when backed into a corner. If there is ONE Messiah then yours is too fucking late to play. The Messiah has already come, his name was Cyrus and we are all living in the aftermath. Not what you expected? Too fucking bad. Maybe learn how the Messiah game is played and you won't be disappointed. It's the Messiah from the line of Bethlehem-Ephratah that's going to alter the way things work but your little god-guy didn't pass the test since he died before he bothered to do shit on the list of things Messiah's do (walking around and being a dick doesn't count). The closest thing to a Messiah during that time period would have been nearly one hundred years before or one hundred years after your little jesus. Both of them died before completing the task and therefore could NOT be declared Messiah as per the rules (so to speak). Divinity, no matter how much you want to delude yourself, is NOT a requirement.

 

mwc

[quicksand]

I mean, give the guy a break. Seriously. If He did exist, then He was the closest thing to the Messiah yet, and has affected millions of people even up until today. Thats a fact. He has supplied the insight and surroundings, from His teachings; that I truly believe have let America be the mighty country it is today.

Well that's just the thing Yo!Yo. Why should I give poor indefensible Jesus a break? Hell, the man can walk on water and wilt fig trees at will. You think a guy with all that supernatural power could stand up to a little scrunity? Why should I give him a break? Because he asserts that God sent him? Have you given Joseph Smith a break? Tu quque... I know, I know.

 

Just because someone allegedes they are a messiah, should I just accept it? There are instances of others 'round "biblical-times" that asserted just the same thing. When I get home I can site my references if it is that necessary for you.

 

But, play with me for a second here.

 

I used to see Jesus – the second coming! – on the redline on my way to work in Chicago everyday. If you asked him who he was between cigarettes he'd tell you he was Jesus and the second coming blah blah blah was here.

 

Tell me, should I just accept that? And why not? Its what Christians largely believe anyway.

 

Thanks in advance.

[LosingMyReligion]

Jesus was nothing more than a popular cult leader, period.

 

And the reason he is still being preached is because all that crap was passed down through the centuries...Much like Judaism and Islam.

 

Believe me, Jesus was just another man who got the proverbial Paul Bunyan treatment....

 

Also, David Koresh said he was a Messiah too...And he had followers.

[Abiyoyo]

 

Okay, let's assume for a second he did exist. Now, as I already pointed out to you in another thread, the Messiah is a warrior, not a priest/healer/dead guy, so I'm not giving jesus a break as he was nothing like a Messiah.

 

I already pointed out Biblically, in Revelations, that He is appointed to be that warrior, in the last days. You are stuck on your fixated veiw without even taking into consideration the veiw I share. I am a believer, MWC, that is poking at thoughts and ideas in discussion, putting my thoughts down, and interacting with others of different veiwpoints. I really, at this point, dont even know why Im still responding to you, because every time I my a certain Biblical point, you start lashing out at me with your rubbish.

 

Second, I'm going to say this in a way that I hope you can understand once and for all. There has already been a Messiah. His name was Cyrus the Great (Cyrus II). He allowed the return of the Jews from Babylon.

 

Thats the point MWC. If everyone in this world thought exactly on that track; we would have a world full of you. There is much of this MWC that I already know about and have looked into; yet I still choose to believe what I believe. The problem here is that you want to coin anyone that doesnt accept your badgering veiws as an idiot.

 

My points have all been set aroundthe idea that maybe God sent Jesus just the way He wanted Him to be; even Jesus said what He said, died the way He did, didnt provoke war for the Jews, and just came the way He did because thats really the way He was suppose to come. I have Biblical knowledge that people see things one way, and expect God to do another; when in reality God is trying to do something entirely different. Thats a Biblical fact. Ex: Moses, the people for years and years, shifted moods, complaining, moping around, ungrateful, and forgetful; yet Moses was the guy(Biblically) that God raised up for them. Alot of people miss that part of the Bible. The people were in bondage; God heard their prayers and raised Moses to led them out.

 

The very fact that Yhwh had carried out His prophecy in a wholly unexpected manner, by choosing a pagan to overthrow the idols of the nations, so that He alone might be acknowledged as the only true God, was accepted by the second Isaiah as the surest evidence of the divine government. This prophet, Cyrus, through whom were to be redeemed His chosen people, whom He would glorify before all the world, was the promised Messiah, "the Shepherd of Yhwh" (xliv. 28, xlv. 1).

 

Humm..I guess I could throw in some verse from Daniel, since you have choosen your reference manuel.

 

Don't trust me when I say there are many more...look it up...look them all up and then drill it into your stupid fucking mind. There has already been a god damned Messiah declared by the Jews and written into the bible that you love and read and practically worship and walking on this fucking planet over 500 fucking years before your stupid failed god-man! Get it?

 

Are you alright man? I mean, its just discussion and conversation, that is a choice. You dont have to interact with me.

 

If I didnt have better sense; it almost seems as if your witnessing to me ;

 

So get it straight. Quit jumping threads when backed into a corner. If there is ONE Messiah then yours is too fucking late to play. The Messiah has already come, his name was Cyrus and we are all living in the aftermath. Not what you expected? Too fucking bad. Maybe learn how the Messiah game is played and you won't be disappointed. It's the Messiah from the line of Bethlehem-Ephratah that's going to alter the way things work but your little god-guy didn't pass the test since he died before he bothered to do shit on the list of things Messiah's do (walking around and being a dick doesn't count). The closest thing to a Messiah during that time period would have been nearly one hundred years before or one hundred years after your little jesus. Both of them died before completing the task and therefore could NOT be declared Messiah as per the rules (so to speak). Divinity, no matter how much you want to delude yourself, is NOT a requirement.

 

 

Actually, yes, our little run from the other thread provoked my topic, somewhat. Yet, since I didnt want to highjack someone elses thread; I did what Im suppose to and start my own.

 

 

 

 

Okay, let's assume for a second he did exist. Now, as I already pointed out to you in another thread, the Messiah is a warrior, not a priest/healer/dead guy, so I'm not giving jesus a break as he was nothing like a Messiah.

 

I already pointed out Biblically, in Revelations, that He is appointed to be that warrior, in the last days. You are stuck on your fixated veiw without even taking into consideration the veiw I share. I am a believer, MWC, that is poking at thoughts and ideas in discussion, putting my thoughts down, and interacting with others of different veiwpoints. I really, at this point, dont even know why Im still responding to you, because every time I my a certain Biblical point, you start lashing out at me with your rubbish.

 

Second, I'm going to say this in a way that I hope you can understand once and for all. There has already been a Messiah. His name was Cyrus the Great (Cyrus II). He allowed the return of the Jews from Babylon.

 

Thats the point MWC. If everyone in this world thought exactly on that track; we would have a world full of you. There is much of this MWC that I already know about and have looked into; yet I still choose to believe what I believe. The problem here is that you want to coin anyone that doesnt accept your badgering veiws as an idiot.

 

My points have all been set aroundthe idea that maybe God sent Jesus just the way He wanted Him to be; even Jesus said what He said, died the way He did, didnt provoke war for the Jews, and just came the way He did because thats really the way He was suppose to come. I have Biblical knowledge that people see things one way, and expect God to do another; when in reality God is trying to do something entirely different. Thats a Biblical fact. Ex: Moses, the people for years and years, shifted moods, complaining, moping around, ungrateful, and forgetful; yet Moses was the guy(Biblically) that God raised up for them. Alot of people miss that part of the Bible. The people were in bondage; God heard their prayers and raised Moses to led them out.

 

The very fact that Yhwh had carried out His prophecy in a wholly unexpected manner, by choosing a pagan to overthrow the idols of the nations, so that He alone might be acknowledged as the only true God, was accepted by the second Isaiah as the surest evidence of the divine government. This prophet, Cyrus, through whom were to be redeemed His chosen people, whom He would glorify before all the world, was the promised Messiah, "the Shepherd of Yhwh" (xliv. 28, xlv. 1).

 

Humm..I guess I could throw in some verse from Daniel, since you have choosen your reference manuel.

 

Don't trust me when I say there are many more...look it up...look them all up and then drill it into your stupid fucking mind. There has already been a god damned Messiah declared by the Jews and written into the bible that you love and read and practically worship and walking on this fucking planet over 500 fucking years before your stupid failed god-man! Get it?

 

Are you alright man? I mean, its just discussion and conversation, that is a choice. You dont have to interact with me.

 

If I didnt have better sense; it almost seems as if your witnessing to me ;

 

So get it straight. Quit jumping threads when backed into a corner. If there is ONE Messiah then yours is too fucking late to play. The Messiah has already come, his name was Cyrus and we are all living in the aftermath. Not what you expected? Too fucking bad. Maybe learn how the Messiah game is played and you won't be disappointed. It's the Messiah from the line of Bethlehem-Ephratah that's going to alter the way things work but your little god-guy didn't pass the test since he died before he bothered to do shit on the list of things Messiah's do (walking around and being a dick doesn't count). The closest thing to a Messiah during that time period would have been nearly one hundred years before or one hundred years after your little jesus. Both of them died before completing the task and therefore could NOT be declared Messiah as per the rules (so to speak). Divinity, no matter how much you want to delude yourself, is NOT a requirement.

 

 

Actually, yes, our little run from the other thread provoked my topic, somewhat. Yet, since I didnt want to highjack someone elses thread; I did what Im suppose to and start my own.

 

 

Just because someone allegedes they are a messiah, should I just accept it? There are instances of others 'round "biblical-times" that asserted just the same thing. When I get home I can site my references if it is that necessary for you.

 

 

Out of all those references that I already have researched and know about; which Messiah candidate claimed that His Father was the God of Israel and also claimed Himself to be His Son. I mean, thats why Im saying whats the fuss. Did any other of these Messiahs claim heritage to the God of Israel?

[NotBlinded]

No matter how you slice it, it's the people that are resonsible for everything then and now regardless of what they believe. You are trying to fit an entire world into a box and stick a bible on top of it! Please...it's not that simple.

[quicksand]

Just because someone allegedes they are a messiah, should I just accept it? There are instances of others 'round "biblical-times" that asserted just the same thing. When I get home I can site my references if it is that necessary for you.

Out of all those references that I already have researched and know about; which Messiah candidate claimed that His Father was the God of Israel and also claimed Himself to be His Son. I mean, thats why Im saying whats the fuss. Did any other of these Messiahs claim heritage to the God of Israel?

I am the second coming of Christ, YoYo. The Bible perfectly describes my coming. I have the pedigree. Revelation is at hand as My father has stoked the fires between the infidels and His people.

 

The temple will be rebuilt anyday now. Anyday.

 

There, you see, it doesnt take much to fullfill the claim.

[OnceConvinced]

Why Jesus? Why does He have to be the one of many, or the one that lied? The one mocked, ridiculed, smuged, into this character of fictional being. Why does He have to be the one that didnt exist, or existed but made to seem as if He were a conn artist? Why does He have to be the one who didnt do it exactly like everyone wanted, or in the ways we want to see it, with our deep allknowing mindsets?

 

Well on this site, probably because most of us are ex-Christians here, not Ex buddhists or Ex Muslims, so of course he will be the target. That and the fact people here believe Jesus never came through for them. That's why he's the one mocked, ridiculed and believed to be fiction.

[Minstrel]

Speaking for myself, I have no problem with Jesus. I think he probably existed, and was a leader of men and women.

Why would you claim him to be Messiah, though?

Basing it on OT stuff?

The word "Messiah" isn't located on one page of your New Testament.

Doesn't sound like those who wrote those books were thinking "Messiah" to me.

The whole "Messiah" link didn't come into play until those constructing the validations for Christianity decided they needed to find some OT prophecies to justify their story...

[quicksand]

Why would you claim him to be Messiah, though?

Why not? If extordinary claims are not met with extordinary evidence (to quote Sagan) and the standard by which you come to determine what is a messiah and what is not leaves no way to determine if that is in fact the case, then any claim is as good as another.

 

If we can use the same methodology to establish that in fact my claim to messiahhood is false, then that same method should work for Jesus as well.

 

I am waiting for Yo!Yo to do just that. I've asked this about how we establish what are the proper creditianals of so-called prophets.

 

And I am not taking about quoting the bible either. I want a solid epistemological approach.

[mwc]

I already pointed out Biblically, in Revelations, that He is appointed to be that warrior, in the last days. You are stuck on your fixated veiw without even taking into consideration the veiw I share. I am a believer, MWC, that is poking at thoughts and ideas in discussion, putting my thoughts down, and interacting with others of different veiwpoints. I really, at this point, dont even know why Im still responding to you, because every time I my a certain Biblical point, you start lashing out at me with your rubbish.

Let's see. You want me to "give a break" to a made up character that doesn't meet the criteria for being the Messiah. Then I actually point you to someone who was a real-life Messiah and you in turn DENY him. Talk about irony.

 

Also, nothing you say are your ideas. They are doctrine. I've been in your shoes. I've had your thoughts. You haven't said anything unique. Your viewpoint is simply xian. The Book of Revelation is simply to say the world was going to end because Nero was going to return to destroy the world as people knew it. He didn't. We're all still here. Jesus failed to save the day. Now what? Just like the Book of Daniel was about Antiuchus IV and the Maccabees. The "prophecies" don't work out so well but you'll keep on re-interpreting them for, what? 2000+ years now? Still no luck. Talk about rubbish.

 

Thats the point MWC. If everyone in this world thought exactly on that track; we would have a world full of you. There is much of this MWC that I already know about and have looked into; yet I still choose to believe what I believe. The problem here is that you want to coin anyone that doesnt accept your badgering veiws as an idiot.

I'd love to say a world full of people like me would be a good thing but even I know it wouldn't be. Xians on the other hand on aren't that bright. They think the world would just get better and better if we all thought the same way. History proves just the opposite though. As for my "badgering" views. If by "badgering" you mean that you refuse to acknowledge them and run like a frightened child then yes, I badger. I will "badger" you on this just like I did with John the Baptist and every other topic that doesn't stand up in the bible (which is pretty much all of them).

 

My points have all been set aroundthe idea that maybe God sent Jesus just the way He wanted Him to be; even Jesus said what He said, died the way He did, didnt provoke war for the Jews, and just came the way He did because thats really the way He was suppose to come. I have Biblical knowledge that people see things one way, and expect God to do another; when in reality God is trying to do something entirely different. Thats a Biblical fact. Ex: Moses, the people for years and years, shifted moods, complaining, moping around, ungrateful, and forgetful; yet Moses was the guy(Biblically) that God raised up for them. Alot of people miss that part of the Bible. The people were in bondage; God heard their prayers and raised Moses to led them out.

Considering there's zero evidence for Moses I'll have to assume that you mean that we're just talking about the allegory. You see, all evidence shows the Jews came south from Canaan and not "up" from Egypt. So your "fact" is based on a fairy tale.

 

Humm..I guess I could throw in some verse from Daniel, since you have choosen your reference manuel.

Throw out every verse under the sun. There isn't a single one that worries me. Go to your prefered apologetic website, find your prefered apologetic source and throw the argument at me. And once I beat the shit out of it and you have no where to turn you will leave this thread. That's how it works when you don't think for yourself.

 

Are you alright man? I mean, its just discussion and conversation, that is a choice. You dont have to interact with me.

 

If I didnt have better sense; it almost seems as if your witnessing to me ;

Ahhh...did my bold red letters and "nasty" words upset you?

 

Yes I am witnessing to you. Accept Cyrus II as your personal saviour since you seem to think that the Messiah is to be worshipped, divine and accepted as a personal saviour. For some reason you refuse to accept what the Messiah is and instead replace the concept with what you want it to be.

 

Actually, yes, our little run from the other thread provoked my topic, somewhat. Yet, since I didnt want to highjack someone elses thread; I did what Im suppose to and start my own.

Don't play games. You should have started your own thread from the strart, or right after if this was your concern. Not only that but you should have continued what was started in the other thread and maybe told people you were taking the sonversation elsewhere. Did you? No, you punked out.

 

Out of all those references that I already have researched and know about; which Messiah candidate claimed that His Father was the God of Israel and also claimed Himself to be His Son. I mean, thats why Im saying whats the fuss. Did any other of these Messiahs claim heritage to the God of Israel?

Who gives a shit? Show me in the OT where this is a requirement for the Messiah. Can you do it? Not only that but can you even give a basic understanding of what the hell a Messiah is? All you do is blather on about the Messiah this and the Messiah that. Give jesus a break. But you say literally nothing. When you run the 2000 presidential election, and lose, even if you come back in 2012 and win you're not the 2000 presidential winner. Jesus lost his run for year 33 Messiah. He died and went away if we believe the story. So when he "returns" it's a fresh start. A do-over. So any "prophecies" to do with the Messiah that he "fulfilled" then don't count. He will be running for the year <whatever> Messiah on his "return." So that's all that matters.

 

So, I say to you, YoYo. Give CyrusII a break. He's the only man in history we can point to that we known to actually be the Messiah (not just come close, or to maybe get it right in two chances thousands of years apart but to do it the first time during his one life). CyrusII is worthy of your love and respect. He freed the chosen people from bondage in Babylon. He helped rebuild god's temple. He fulfilled the prophephies in Isaiah and Daniel. He was the Messiah. He deserves a break.

 

mwc

[SkepticOfBible]

I mean, give the guy a break. Seriously. If He did exist, then He was the closest thing to the Messiah yet,

Tell that to the Jews who are still wating their Messiah

 

http://messiahtruth.com/wanted.html

 

My thought is maybe God intended to let Jesus be just the person that He was so that way if one choose to seek God genuinely no matter what, never forsaking Him

 

i am not sure what you saying here, isn't Jesus god himself according to you?

 

That this Holy Spirit will guide us and direct us into all truths

However the evidence shows otherwise. 200000 denomination and 8 different biblical canons is hardly what you call "leading to all truth"?

Yes, God in the Ot did many weird things

You mean like ordering the murder of babies?

[Abiyoyo]

 

Let's see. You want me to "give a break" to a made up character that doesn't meet the criteria for being the Messiah. Then I actually point you to someone who was a real-life Messiah and you in turn DENY him. Talk about irony.

 

He was not a Jew

 

Also, nothing you say are your ideas. They are doctrine. I've been in your shoes. I've had your thoughts. You haven't said anything unique. Your viewpoint is simply xian. The Book of Revelation is simply to say the world was going to end because Nero was going to return to destroy the world as people knew it. He didn't.

 

You sound like John Hagee

 

We're all still here. Jesus failed to save the day. Now what? Just like the Book of Daniel was about Antiuchus IV and the Maccabees. The "prophecies" don't work out so well but you'll keep on re-interpreting them for, what? 2000+ years now? Still no luck. Talk about rubbish.

 

 

 

Dan 6:25-7:27

25 Then king Darius wrote unto all people, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth; Peace be multiplied unto you.

26 I make a decree, That in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel: for he is the living God, and stedfast for ever, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, and his dominion shall be even unto the end.

(KJV)

 

Considering there's zero evidence for Moses I'll have to assume that you mean that we're just talking about the allegory. You see, all evidence shows the Jews came south from Canaan and not "up" from Egypt. So your "fact" is based on a fairy tale.

 

What about the Egyptian chariot wheels they found in the sea?

 

Yes I am witnessing to you. Accept Cyrus II as your personal saviour since you seem to think that the Messiah is to be worshipped, divine and accepted as a personal saviour. For some reason you refuse to accept what the Messiah is and instead replace the concept with what you want it to be.

 

 

 

So, I say to you, YoYo. Give CyrusII a break.

 

The Zoro man

 

 

 

 

 

Let's see. You want me to "give a break" to a made up character that doesn't meet the criteria for being the Messiah. Then I actually point you to someone who was a real-life Messiah and you in turn DENY him. Talk about irony.

 

He was not a Jew

 

Also, nothing you say are your ideas. They are doctrine. I've been in your shoes. I've had your thoughts. You haven't said anything unique. Your viewpoint is simply xian. The Book of Revelation is simply to say the world was going to end because Nero was going to return to destroy the world as people knew it. He didn't.

 

You sound like John Hagee

 

We're all still here. Jesus failed to save the day. Now what? Just like the Book of Daniel was about Antiuchus IV and the Maccabees. The "prophecies" don't work out so well but you'll keep on re-interpreting them for, what? 2000+ years now? Still no luck. Talk about rubbish.

 

 

 

Dan 6:25-7:27

25 Then king Darius wrote unto all people, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth; Peace be multiplied unto you.

26 I make a decree, That in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel: for he is the living God, and stedfast for ever, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, and his dominion shall be even unto the end.

(KJV)

 

Considering there's zero evidence for Moses I'll have to assume that you mean that we're just talking about the allegory. You see, all evidence shows the Jews came south from Canaan and not "up" from Egypt. So your "fact" is based on a fairy tale.

 

What about the Egyptian chariot wheels they found in the sea?

 

Yes I am witnessing to you. Accept Cyrus II as your personal saviour since you seem to think that the Messiah is to be worshipped, divine and accepted as a personal saviour. For some reason you refuse to accept what the Messiah is and instead replace the concept with what you want it to be.

 

 

 

So, I say to you, YoYo. Give CyrusII a break.

 

The Zoro man

 

 

 

 

MODS. Can someone either be fair and give me an edit button or fix my last post. This is freakin annoying.

[Abiyoyo]

Tell that to the Jews who are still wating their Messiah

 

http://messiahtruth.com/wanted.html

 

 

That's a pretty bias site. Poor reference.

[quicksand]

Jesus can't be a jew. His dad is God. And don't prattle about his mum. Unless God is Jewish.

[KT45]

Tell that to the Jews who are still wating their Messiah

 

http://messiahtruth.com/wanted.html

 

 

That's a pretty bias site. Poor reference.

When it comes to religion, what is an unbiased site? A christian site isn't going to show that particular information because they have a bias with Jesus and all. You won't listen to a jewish site because they are biased. If you went to an athiest website with the same information you would say they are biased. No matter what you go to, if it involves religion it's going to be biased one way or the other. I guess you'll never learn about other peoples claims because they are biased.

[Abiyoyo]

Tell that to the Jews who are still wating their Messiah

 

http://messiahtruth.com/wanted.html

 

 

That's a pretty bias site. Poor reference.

When it comes to religion, what is an unbiased site? A christian site isn't going to show that particular information because they have a bias with Jesus and all. You won't listen to a jewish site because they are biased. If you went to an athiest website with the same information you would say they are biased. No matter what you go to, if it involves religion it's going to be biased one way or the other. I guess you'll never learn about other peoples claims because they are biased.

 

 

 

Good point, and thats the point. Any kind of interpretation of scriptures whether it be from a Jew, converted Jew, Christian, Atheist, whatever; will be bias around what the underline motive is geared toward. A good example is in reading the material from this referenced site above, I began to think much of scripture that would further explain in the aspect of Christianity.

 

The thing though is that it would be considered my opinion, not concrete. The bias part is that the referenced material was referred in sometype of factual stance. Im not really sure why anyone would consider that a leading motive of reason toward the status of the Messiah topic.

 

Then again, thats the point though. Thats all we have, bias references. So really, nobody thinking in a logical scale can conclude without a doubt that anything is or isnt regarding the Jewish Messiah. Or better yet, nobody can give any kind of concrete reasoning or evidence other than a reference from a bias site.

 

In which all comes to this. One says this and the other says that in our bias interpretations, leaving a gray area in general. Then, that gray area in both sects have to be filled to avoid total confusion. Thats where the idea is born, in my opinion. The one side may sway toward the contradictions and variances, as well as the authunticity of the Bible; where as the other side may sway toward the fundalmentalist veiw of its all based around faith, or a spiritual thing.

[KT45]

Good point, and thats the point. Any kind of interpretation of scriptures whether it be from a Jew, converted Jew, Christian, Atheist, whatever; will be bias around what the underline motive is geared toward. A good example is in reading the material from this referenced site above, I began to think much of scripture that would further explain in the aspect of Christianity.

 

The thing though is that it would be considered my opinion, not concrete. The bias part is that the referenced material was referred in sometype of factual stance. Im not really sure why anyone would consider that a leading motive of reason toward the status of the Messiah topic.

 

Then again, thats the point though. Thats all we have, bias references. So really, nobody thinking in a logical scale can conclude without a doubt that anything is or isnt regarding the Jewish Messiah. Or better yet, nobody can give any kind of concrete reasoning or evidence other than a reference from a bias site.

 

In which all comes to this. One says this and the other says that in our bias interpretations, leaving a gray area in general. Then, that gray area in both sects have to be filled to avoid total confusion. Thats where the idea is born, in my opinion. The one side may sway toward the contradictions and variances, as well as the authunticity of the Bible; where as the other side may sway toward the fundalmentalist veiw of its all based around faith, or a spiritual thing.

Hmmm...Interesting but the Jews have history to back there bias. There interpretation comes from themselves since they originally wrote it. Since they have more knowledge about jewish history, jewish culture, jewish traditions and more importantly jewish writing styles and story telling, then aren't they the ones who have a better chance at interpreting text? I just never liked europeans or americans trying to tell me what jewish text actually meant to fit their agenda and I never will.

[KT45]

Can anyone answer this question? When is it permissable to dismiss information based on bias? Our friend YoYo dismissed information because it was from a jewish site. Normally I wouldn't see that as wise because I think you should at least view the information and refute it before dismissing it. But if someone gave me a creationist website I might dismiss it before ever looking at it. Am I wrong for doing so? So again

 

When is okay to dismiss info based on bias?

[Taphophilia]

Can anyone answer this question? When is it permissable to dismiss information based on bias? Our friend YoYo dismissed information because it was from a jewish site. Normally I wouldn't see that as wise because I think you should at least view the information and refute it before dismissing it. But if someone gave me a creationist website I might dismiss it before ever looking at it. Am I wrong for doing so? So again

 

When is okay to dismiss info based on bias?

 

Wasn't the whole point of posting the link as giving a source of how Judaism does not accept Jesus as being the Messiah? Why woud YoYo expect it to be objective in the first place? It's from a Jewish perspective which was Skeptics point.

[mwc]

He was not a Jew

That doesn't matter and you know it. The absolute fact of the matter is Cyrus the Great was named Messiah by the Jews themselves. Not by some outsiders later on. Not by me wanting to make a point 2500 years later but by the Jews of the day...his contemporaries and it made it into their bible. That is the one and only fact that matters.

 

You sound like John Hagee

Googled him. Seemed to be some TBN guy. Didn't take the time to familiarize myself with his teachings so I don't get your reference.

 

Dan 6:25-7:27

25 Then king Darius wrote unto all people, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth; Peace be multiplied unto you.

26 I make a decree, That in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel: for he is the living God, and stedfast for ever, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, and his dominion shall be even unto the end.

(KJV)

And? Your point being? You love to quote verses and say absolutely nothing about it.

 

However ALL evidence shows that Darius followed Zoroaster. There's zero evidence to show that he, like all those that came before and after him, had anything to do with our pal YHWH (other than he had a degree of religious tolerance in his kingdom). There's widespread evidence of Zoroaster not YWHW in his kingdom so the decree above must have been ignored (not likely) or simply a lie (very likely). Real history contridicts the biblical fantasy yet again.

 

Further, Darius I ruled starting in 521BC and then Daniel chapter 7 supposedly happens about 553BC. That's a painful continuity error unless you're trying to make a different point.

 

What about the Egyptian chariot wheels they found in the sea?

What about them? No one has seen them outside the initial claimant (pictures are useless except for initial documentation and disclosure). The guy that keeps coming up with this bullshit is just a liar until he submits to peer review like an honest researcher. He's discovered the real location of Mount Sinai (no proof). The real Noah's Ark (no proof). And I think the Ark of the Covenant (no proof). He's got a whole lot of nothing. What an amazing man. Until he takes and lets anyone, with real credentials and not just bible-thumpers (and he doesn't really even allow this) take a look at these "finds" then he's got nothing.

 

But I can tell you that even a reasonable explanation could be found for such things to be in the ocean. Perhaps they were on a ship being transported and it sank? Perhaps it was close to shore, on and overlook, and fell in? The location of the object is unknown and so we are only able to speculate aren't we? It should also be in the Sea of Reeds (an unknown location) but why squabble over petty details, right?

 

There should be an entire ancient Egyptian army worth of this stuff sitting out there and not just a few wheels. Now it's up to you to explain away the missing corpses (both human and horses) and the missing weapons and the missing everything else (bridles and so forth) and reduce it down to a few wheels (keeping in mind the bottom of and ocean is actually quite still compared to the surface). I understand that there are reasons why things wouldn't last but if those wheels were so "miraculously" preserved then out of hundreds or thousands of soldiers why just a few wheels? Like the rest of the story it just doesn't add up. The amount of evidence is sorely disproportionate to the story.

 

The Zoro man

One of these days I might just get one of your references (but maybe I don't want to).

 

Personally, I find it amusing how you mock Cyrus II, who was named the Messiah, and yet your own personal choice, who was not named as such, seems to be deserving of a break. You come in here, start this thread and ask me to reconsider him even though he's simply not the man for the job. When I point out someone else who already got the position you seem to want to demean him. The problem is it's too late. He already lived and died. You can't take away his title now. He beat your guy to it and stomping your feet and making jokes won't change it.

 

Cyrus II IS the Messiah the bible speaks of long before your guy was even being written about. The author of Daniel simply thought Judas Maccabee was going to be the Jewish Messiah. The one to usher in the final age. Unfortunately, Judas died in battle ending his run for glory.

 

mwc

[SkepticOfBible]

That's a pretty bias site. Poor reference.

 

On the contrary it is good representative on the jewish position of the rejection of the Christian message.

 

Offcourse they will be biased. They are Jewish Counter Missionary Websites. However you have to back up the statement about why it is poor reference? Please be specific, instead of vague. For that you will have to read the site though.

 

It is definately one of the best researched ones that I have seen.

 

What about them? No one has seen them outside the initial claimant (pictures are useless except for initial documentation and disclosure). The guy that keeps coming up with this bullshit is just a liar until he submits to peer review like an honest researcher. He's discovered the real location of Mount Sinai (no proof). The real Noah's Ark (no proof). And I think the Ark of the Covenant (no proof). He's got a whole lot of nothing. What an amazing man. Until he takes and lets anyone, with real credentials and not just bible-thumpers (and he doesn't really even allow this) take a look at these "finds" then he's got nothing.

 

if he is pointing to Ron Wyatt, then I recommend the following CHRISTIAN site which exposes his fraud.

 

http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/

 

If there was evidence for Moses or Noah's,you can bet the Jews will be first one to claim.

 

Yet their position is this when it comes to the bible

 

http://www.aish.com/spirituality/48ways/Wa..._For_Living.asp

 

some critics have trouble accepting the idea of divine intervention. For them, all the biblical phenomenon need to be explained in terms of nature. A book called "World in Collision," for example, explains the splitting of the Red Sea like this:

A tremendous comet approached earth at the time the Egyptians were chasing the Jews. At that precise moment, the comet was in position to tear the Red Sea apart by the force of gravity, leaving dry land between two walls of the sea. The Jews entered the sea, and sure enough, the Egyptians followed. Luckily, the Jews came out the other side just as the comet passed, and the water returned, drowning the Egyptians.

Simple, right? You don't need God.

How does this book explain the manna bread that the Jews collected every morning for 40 years in the desert? After the comet passed, particles of petroleum remained in the higher atmosphere. It eventually burned off and mixed with the dew. The falling dew combined with a particular micro-bacteria that digests petroleum products and converts it into protein.

Thus explains how every morning, for 40 years, a nation of Jews picked up manna bread - "dew containing predigested protein." On Fridays, there was a double portion, but he doesn't explain that...

These explanations are missing the point. Torah isn't a history book, a physics book or a storybook. Rather, it is Torat Chaim - literally "instructions for living." Every word, every phrase contains a message how to maximize pleasure in life. Look for the deeper message - the wisdom within - and you will reap immense rewards.

 

basically YoYo, for the Judaism, it doesn't matter that the bible has be literally and factually correct. Why? because they don't want nor have to prove to anybody

 

Also check out the following official Isreali website

 

King David and Jerusalem- Myth and Reality

 

Until very recently, there was no evidence outside the Bible for the existence of King David. There are no references to him in Egyptian, Syrian or Assyrian documents of the time, and the many archaeological digs in the City of David failed to turn up so much as a mention of his name

....

The saga of the Israelites, as told in the Bible, was designed as a morality tale to prove the importance of faith in the One God. The stories of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses and Joshua demonstrate that the Israelites were rewarded when they obeyed God, but were punished when they strayed.

 

The historical evidence to back up these events is sparse, and, in some cases, contradictory. In particular, the account of Joshua's conquest of Canaan is inconsistent with the archaeological evidence. Cities supposedly conquered by Joshua in the 14th century bce were destroyed long before he came on the scene. Some, such as Ai and Arad, had been ruins for a 1000 years.

....

The conclusion is somewhat startling to Bible readers who know the Canaanites portrayed in the Bible as immoral idolaters: most of the Israelites were in fact formerly Canaanites. The story of Abraham's journey from Ur of the Chaldees, the Patriarchs, the Exodus, Sinai, and the conquest of Canaan, all these were apparently based on legends that the various elements brought with them from their countries of origin. The consolidation of the Israelites into a nation was not the result of wanderings in the desert and divine revelation, but came from the need to defend themselves against the Philistines, who settled in the Canaanite coastal plain more or less at the same time the Israelites were establishing themselves in the hills.

 

....

The Book of Judges, which directly contradicts Joshua, and shows the Israelites settling the land over a prolonged period, is nearer historical reality; but even it cannot be taken at face value.

 

 

For the Jews and even for Catholic it doesn't matter if the bible is factually correct. What matters to them is their faith and their relationship with their God. As far as they are concerned, God is big enough to take care of people's spiritual need.

[mwc]

Offcourse they will be biased. They are Jewish Counter Missionary Websites. However you have to back up the statement about why it is poor reference? Please be specific, instead of vague. For that you will have to read the site though.

It's poor simply because it doesn't say jesus is the Messiah like YoYo wants. In YoYo's defense I would have said the very same when I was in his camp. I never understood how the Jews missed the obvious choice of jesus when I was xian. How could they be so blind. Once I deconverted I took it upon myself to research it (without the help of websites to avoid their bias and "poison" myself) and I was quite amazed to see how badly *I* had missed by choosing jesus. After that exercise I can see that the Jewish websites, like this one, do a fairly balanced job of presenting their side unlike the majority of the xian websites.

 

if he is pointing to Ron Wyatt, then I recommend the following CHRISTIAN site which exposes his fraud.

 

http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/

That's him. You'd think I'd remember that name by now. That website lists off even more things than I remember him lying about.

 

If there was evidence for Moses or Noah's,you can bet the Jews will be first one to claim.

In a heartbeat...and I'd love to hear about it. I dislike the religion not the history.

 

For the Jews and even for Catholic it doesn't matter if the bible is factually correct. What matters to them is their faith and their relationship with their God. As far as they are concerned, God is big enough to take care of people's spiritual need.

To bad more xians can't take this to heart. If they just need to have this religion in their life then they need learn that the religion is just a part of your life instead of your life is just a part of the religion.

 

mwc