Trump says Jewish voters would be to blame if he loses

[Walt]

is that like "palestinian identity"?

something that's "not a thing" , according to some pompous arrogant Jews?

Christian Identity is a thing. There are people who identify as members of Christian Identity, so it exists. Their origin story might not be real, much like the Neo-Nazi Aryan origin story is not real, but they are real.

The Palestinian origin story is controversial, but they certainly exist in the present.

 

[Walt]

yes. all religions are kind of ridiculous in essence.

but the teaching of judaism is that a final messiah is to come, and it's not Jesus.

you can take it up with rambam if you don't agree.

That is the Christian understanding of Judaism, but not necessarily the Jewish understanding of Judaism. There are many different Jewish understandings, because Jews are just like that, but the Christian understanding starts with a false premise.

There have been two Temples created. Each time, God sent multiple messiahs to help create it. There needs to be messiahs to get in done politically and financially, but also messiahs to teach the priests and people the proper practices with the Temple. The last part is important, because no one knew how to run a Temple.

And God has twice destroyed the Temple. When destroying the Temple, the knowledge of how to properly run the Temple was also destroyed. Messiahs are needed to teach us how to run the Temple.

A major thread of Judaism is building the Third Temple. Christians tend to think that is somehow the end of time. Most Jews would just think that is a transition to a golden age.

Jews tend to say that golden age will last 1,000 years, so hardly the end of the world.

 

[Walt]

mainstream denomination are corrupted.

we can read bitch.

Jesus said he is the son of god, and the saviour.

that's a christian belief.


for Jews the saviour is yet to come.

Jesus also said we are all the children of God. He seems to have liked playing word games making statements that can be interpreted in multiple ways.

What is not in question is who Jesus' mother is. Jewish religious law thought things out, and realized the mother identity of a baby is rarely in question, certainly not in the same way that the father's identity can be in question. Jesus' mother was Mary, a Jewish woman.

And Peter's parents were both Jews. All the original disciples were Jewish. Even the Christians that came after Jesus were all Jewish. Paul was originally Saul, and wanted to be a Jewish priest. Barnabus was a Jew from Cyprus.

There began being more and more Gentiles(non-Jews) who wanted to Christians. At first they were required to convert to Judaism first, but then one night Peter had a dream about unkosher food falling from heaven, and it was decided Gentiles could be Christian. Then when the Jewish Temple was destroyed, and the Jews exiled, it became clear that there was no center of Judaism to convert, and Christians finally broke away from Judaism.

 

[Lao Tse]

Jesus also said we are all the children of God. He seems to have liked playing word games making statements that can be interpreted in multiple ways.

What is not in question is who Jesus' mother is. Jewish religious law thought things out, and realized the mother identity of a baby is rarely in question, certainly not in the same way that the father's identity can be in question. Jesus' mother was Mary, a Jewish woman.

And Peter's parents were both Jews. All the original disciples were Jewish. Even the Christians that came after Jesus were all Jewish. Paul was originally Saul, and wanted to be a Jewish priest. Barnabus was a Jew from Cyprus.

There began being more and more Gentiles(non-Jews) who wanted to Christians. At first they were required to convert to Judaism first, but then one night Peter had a dream about unkosher food falling from heaven, and it was decided Gentiles could be Christian. Then when the Jewish Temple was destroyed, and the Jews exiled, it became clear that there was no center of Judaism to convert, and Christians finally broke away from Judaism.

i suppose it depends on if you consider jewish a race or a religion.

something of the mind and of faith and of the heart, or of the meat vehicle.

 

[Walt]

i suppose it depends on if you consider jewish a race or a religion.

something of the mind and of faith and of the heart, or of the meat vehicle.

Only a Jew can be King of the Jews. If Jesus was the King of the Jews, then he must be a Jew. At the time, the Jews were seen as a kingdom.

 

[moon]

Only a Jew can be King of the Jews. If Jesus was the King of the Jews, then he must be a Jew. At the time, the Jews were seen as a kingdom.

A ' small tribal kingdom at best ' Israeli archaeologists have determined that to be fact.

' This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai. Most of those who are engaged in scientific work in the interlocking spheres of the Bible, archaeology and the history of the Jewish people – and who once went into the field looking for proof to corroborate the Bible story – now agree that the historic events relating to the stages of the Jewish people’s emergence are radically different from what that story tells. '

Ze’ev Herzog and the historicity of the Bible - Noah Kennedy

Explore Noah Kennedy's discussion with Dr. Ze'ev Herzog on the historicity of biblical stories. Gain insights from a distinguished Israeli archaeologist

noahkennedy.net

 

[Lao Tse]

Only a Jew can be King of the Jews. If Jesus was the King of the Jews, then he must be a Jew. At the time, the Jews were seen as a kingdom.

king of the Jews was a perjorative put on him mockingly by the Romans.

 

[moon]

Jesus also said we are all the children of God. He seems to have liked playing word games making statements that can be interpreted in multiple ways.

Nobody knows what Jesus of Nazareth might have said. So-called ' accounts ' of the words of biblical characters can all be said to be fictional.
The New Testament is hearsay and the Old Testament is myth.

 

[moon]

king of the Jews was a perjorative put on him mockingly by the Romans.

Perhaps. Perhaps not. If it's in the same book as ' rising to heaven in a fiery chariot ' then you can safely put it in the ' Romantic novel ' section.

 

[Lao Tse]

kings can be a different religion than their people.

it happens sometimes.

 

[Walt]

Nobody knows what Jesus of Nazareth might have said. So-called ' accounts ' of the words of biblical characters can all be said to be fictional.
The New Testament is hearsay and the Old Testament is myth.

I did use the word "seems" to indicate that we cannot be sure what he did or did not say.

There are enough rumors of Jesus from a generation later, that I feel safe in saying that he existed. That being said, I do not feel safe in stating many facts about his life.

Analyzing the language of the Gospels, it appears that lists of his quotes were inserted into stories of his life, but were from two different sources. That would mean there were lists of quotes supposedly by Jesus. To me that makes the quotes more likely to be real quotes, but less likely to be used at the time the Gospels claim.

In the end, I can only say what "seems" to have been said based on the Gospels.

 

[Walt]

A ' small tribal kingdom at best ' Israeli archaeologists have determined that to be fact.

You are confusing time periods. Jesus was not born 3,000 years ago, but rather 2,000 years ago.

Judaea was definitely a kingdom of the Roman Empire, and had been a kingdom for hundreds of years. The archaeology and history agree on that. It is beyond doubt.

The King of the Jews would by definition be the King of Judaea. It could be argued that he was also the King of Israel, but that is a little more of a debatable argument.

 

[Walt]

king of the Jews was a perjorative put on him mockingly by the Romans.

Supposedly, the Three Wise Men traveled to see Jesus, as the King of the Jews, before he was even born. The Three Wise Men would have come from Persia, not Rome.

 

[Lao Tse]

Supposedly, the Three Wise Men traveled to see Jesus, as the King of the Jews, before he was even born. The Three Wise Men would have come from Persia, not Rome.

Jesus was the king of Judea?

even when he was born?

 

[moon]

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

I did use the word "seems" to indicate that we cannot be sure what he did or did not say.

There are enough rumors of Jesus from a generation later, that I feel safe in saying that he existed. That being said, I do not feel safe in stating many facts about his life.

Analyzing the language of the Gospels, it appears that lists of his quotes were inserted into stories of his life, but were from two different sources. That would mean there were lists of quotes supposedly by Jesus. To me that makes the quotes more likely to be real quotes, but less likely to be used at the time the Gospels claim.

In the end, I can only say what "seems" to have been said based on the Gospels.

Well put- but you might consider a little more emphasis than 'seems ' when writing about it.

 

[moon]

You are confusing time periods. Jesus was not born 3,000 years ago, but rather 2,000 years ago.

Judaea was definitely a kingdom of the Roman Empire, and had been a kingdom for hundreds of years. The archaeology and history agree on that. It is beyond doubt.

The King of the Jews would by definition be the King of Judaea. It could be argued that he was also the King of Israel, but that is a little more of a debatable argument.

Are you claiming that there was a significant ' Kingdom of Jews ' 2,000 years ago ? We know that the Old Testament claims are false.

 

[tigerred59]

No one was fooled to start with.

You did the @tigerred59 and @Guno צְבִי schtick back at USMB. This is your newest hate sock - but obviously you can't juggle 3.

Claim... I would give my right arm to get back at USMB, but I've been banned for life. Just because I kept telling the monitors to SUCK A DICK!! Such sensitive ppl these guys are....LOL​

 

[Walt]

king of the Jews was a perjorative put on him mockingly by the Romans.

It is also worth noting that the Romans looked at Jesus, and called him the King of the Jews... The king part of that might have been sarcastic, but it does not work unless Jesus is Jewish. In other words, people who actually met Jesus all agreed he was Jewish.

All the sources proximate to his time agree Jesus is Jewish. It was only in the 20th century, half a world away, after many translations, that Christian Identity came up with their theories. I do not believe they are a reasonable source.

 

[Walt]

Are you claiming that there was a significant ' Kingdom of Jews ' 2,000 years ago ? We know that the Old Testament claims are false.

Judaea would have been after the Old Testament, and during the New Testament. It is a significant kingdom according to Romans, and all the other people's of the time. There is absolutely no doubt it existed.

It ended with the Jewish-Roman Wars. Here is a part of the Arch of Titus depicting Titus' victory over Jerusalem during that war. Note the Jewish menorah being carried off. It was made within a few years of the Roman victory. Obviously, there are a huge number of written records also.

 

[Lao Tse]

It is also worth noting that the Romans looked at Jesus, and called him the King of the Jews... The king part of that might have been sarcastic, but it does not work unless Jesus is Jewish. In other words, people who actually met Jesus all agreed he was Jewish.

All the sources proximate to his time agree Jesus is Jewish. It was only in the 20th century, half a world away, after many translations, that Christian Identity came up with their theories. I do not believe they are a reasonable source.

racially yes.

Christianity is a faith and his beliefs make him the first Christian.

but I understand you're a racist and can't imagine anything different.

that's CRT for you.