SteveB
Well-known member
I said I don't keep track of the materials I've read. I didn't say I didn't remember that I've read them.Then how do you remember you have read Geza Vermes?
I said I don't keep track of the materials I've read. I didn't say I didn't remember that I've read them.Then how do you remember you have read Geza Vermes?
🤣🙄🤦🏾♂️You do not have a voice recording of Jesus' making those comments, do you?
What can you recall reading from Geza Vermes? What points of his do you recall?I said I don't keep track of the materials I've read. I didn't say I didn't remember that I've read them.
Therefore you have no idea as to the accuracy of all those gospel texts.🤣🙄🤦🏾♂️
Uh...
No!
It's been a few years. I'd have to look at my pdf file directory.What can you recall reading from Geza Vermes? What points of his do you recall?
I'd say that you have even less idea of an idea, simply because you're choosing to perish in your sin, and believe that you can hide behind other's beliefs.Therefore you have no idea as to the accuracy of all those gospel texts.
Well then, I'd say it'd be foolish to remain uncertain.We can suppose that some of the comments reportedly made by Jesus have a historic veracity and Geza Vermes discusses this in his work The Authentic Gospel of Jesus but for the rest we cannot be certain.
I would contend the first bit of that. Jesus certainly came to reach the Jews rather than the gentiles but there are examples where he must have reached out to gentiles such as the woman who said even the dogs eat the crumbs from the table, and the casting out of the demon into pigs must have been a gentile community.Another BAR article about the origin of biblical christianity. An originally Jewish community. One that was viewed as a sect of Judaism in its early days.
![]()
The Origin of Christianity
To understand the origin of Christianity, one must begin with the population of Jewish Christians who lived during Jesus’ lifetime.www.biblicalarchaeology.org
Hi.I would contend the first bit of that. Jesus certainly came to reach the Jews rather than the gentiles but there are examples where he must have reached out to gentiles such as the woman who said even the dogs eat the crumbs from the table, and the casting out of the demon into pigs must have been a gentile community.
The letter to the Romans highlights how the gentile church were uncomfortable welcoming back the Jews after being exiled by Nero
What Geza is probably seeing is Greek influence in the.modern church
Christians are Spiritual Israel. Not the physical Israel is God chosen people anymore. Everybody in this world 🌎that accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour is an Israelites SPIRITUAL.Ok.
And?
![]()
Bless Israel With Yeshua - ONE FOR ISRAEL Ministry
We are Jews and Arabs, together serving Messiah Jesus, sharing the Gospel with Israel, making disciples, training leaders, and blessing our communities in the name of Yeshua.www.oneforisrael.org
That's not what is written.Christians are Spiritual Israel.
Have you ever read Romans 9-11?Not the physical Israel is God chosen people anymore.
Nope.Everybody in this world 🌎that accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour is an Israelites SPIRITUAL.
When you are cornered you invariably resort to offering advice about redemption.I'd say that you have even less idea of an idea, simply because you're choosing to perish in your sin, and believe that you can hide behind other's beliefs.
Well then, I'd say it'd be foolish to remain uncertain.
Eternity is a long time to live with what was once uncertainty and upon death becomes--- oh sh88! I seriously screwed up!
I would contend the first bit of that. Jesus certainly came to reach the Jews rather than the gentiles but there are examples where he must have reached out to gentiles such as the woman who said even the dogs eat the crumbs from the table, and the casting out of the demon into pigs must have been a gentile community.
The letter to the Romans highlights how the gentile church were uncomfortable welcoming back the Jews after being exiled by Nero
What Geza is probably seeing is Greek influence in the.modern church
Actually, most modern Bibles translate that as "Simon the Zealot". It is generally recognised that he was either a zealous Jew, or a Jew with that as his family name. I am not aware of anyone who seriously thinks one of Jesus twelves disciples was not a Jew.Hi.
I never said that he didn't impact gentiles.
Remember, one of his disciples was Simon the Canaanite.
Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18.
Is time to see only in the Bible.That's not what is written.
Have you ever read Romans 9-11?
Israel is the People of God.
Nope.
We who are following Jesus are offspring of Abraham, Galatians.
So, you think picking selective things "only in the bible" and ignoring the rest of what's "only in the bible" will actually justify your beliefs?Is time to see only in the Bible.
I'm going to take chapters and verses only written in the Bible.
THE TRUE ISRAEL TODAY!
Matthew 3:9.
John 18:33,36 ... "MY kingdom is NOT of this world."
Exodus 19:5-6 ... "THEN ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people."
1 Kings 6:12-13 ... "THEN I will cut ✂️off Israel"
Jeremiah 18:7-10 ... "If it do evil 😈 in my sight, that it obey not my voice, THEN I will REPENT of the good, wherewith I would benefit them."
Do you see? CONDITIONAL.
Jeremiah 19:8-11... "That cannot be whole again"
Jesus even confirmed Himself, saying to the Jewish nation: Matthew 23:38.
Romans 2:28-29.
Romans 9:6-8 ... "they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of THE PROMISE are counted for the seed."
The nation of Israel is NOT the 'vine', JESUS CHRIST is the 'vine' (John 15:5). The nation of Israel is not the 'seed', JESUS CHRIST is the 'seed' (Galatians 3:16). It is Jesus we are to look to, not the nation of Israel.
Need more BIBLICAL evidence??
let me know!!
Yep.Actually, most modern Bibles translate that as "Simon the Zealot". It is generally recognised that he was either a zealous Jew, or a Jew with that as his family name. I am not aware of anyone who seriously thinks one of Jesus twelves disciples was not a Jew.
I think the answer is that seventeen century scholars did not know as much about the issues as modern scholars do. Our knowledge of ancient languages is better, we have access to more documents - such as the Dead Sea Scrolls - and it is just so much easy to read the views of other scholars. You and I have easy access to vastly more scholarly paper than any seventeen century scholar could ever hope to see in his life time (not saying we read as many, but we are not Biblical scholars)Yep.
The word translated canaanite, is the word zelotes.
So, the question is, why would 1611 bible scholars take that word and use canaanite.
We're not talking about uneducated people here.
You want to drag that up?Similarly, why would 70 highly educated Hebrew scholars take the word almah, and translate it into parthenos when bethula is an unmistakable use of the word we translate virgin?
That would be why religious folk feel they can twist their sacred book to mean whatever they want. I will never understand that.What is it that they knew and understood that you don't actually know or understand?
I think they knew more than you do now.I think the answer is that seventeen century scholars did not know as much about the issues as modern scholars do. Our knowledge of ancient languages is better, we have access to more documents - such as the Dead Sea Scrolls - and it is just so much easy to read the views of other scholars. You and I have easy access to vastly more scholarly paper than any seventeen century scholar could ever hope to see in his life time (not saying we read as many, but we are not Biblical scholars)
I think they know more than you do now.Or do you think seventeenth century scholars tend to be better informed than twentieth and twenty-first century scholars?
What's to drag.You want to drag that up?
The prophecy in Isaiah is clearly about a woman alive at that time, and likely already pregnant. It is not prophesising the birth of the child, it is prophesising the fall of two nations that threated Judah; the baby merely proves the time scale.
It's your eternity. Seems like a very important timescale.A timescale that becomes nonsense if it is about Jesus!
You clearly don't understand anything, because you keep engaging in discussions where you twist our sacred book to mean whatever you want it to mean.That would be why religious folk feel they can twist their sacred book to mean whatever they want. I will never understand that.
Yes, you have just pick another chapter and verses that confirms 👍🏾, that Gentiles are grafted in the place of the disobedience of some literal Israel. Now that you are ignoring to be grafted to the branch. God has put any other Jew or Gentiles in your place.So, you think picking selective things "only in the bible" and ignoring the rest of what's "only in the bible" will actually justify your beliefs?
From Romans 11.
Rom 11:11-36 WEB 11 I ask then, did they stumble that they might fall? May it never be! But by their fall salvation has come to the Gentiles, to provoke them to jealousy. 12 Now if their fall is the riches of the world, and their loss the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness? 13 For I speak to you who are Gentiles. Since then as I am an apostle to Gentiles, I glorify my ministry; 14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh, and may save some of them. 15 For if the rejection of them is the reconciling of the world, what would their acceptance be, but life from the dead? 16 If the first fruit is holy, so is the lump. If the root is holy, so are the branches. 17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the root and of the richness of the olive tree, 18 don’t boast over the branches. But if you boast, it is not you who support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.” 20 True; by their unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by your faith. Don’t be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God didn’t spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 See then the goodness and severity of God. Toward those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in his goodness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 They also, if they don’t continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree, how much more will these, which are the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I don’t desire you to be ignorant, brothers, of this mystery, so that you won’t be wise in your own conceits, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, 26 and so all Israel will be saved. Even as it is written, “There will come out of Zion the Deliverer, and he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob. 27 This is my covenant with them, when I will take away their sins.” 28 Concerning the Good News, they are enemies for your sake. But concerning the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sake. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you in time past were disobedient to God, but now have obtained mercy by their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that by the mercy shown to you they may also obtain mercy. 32 For God has bound all to disobedience, that he might have mercy on all. 33 Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past tracing out! 34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?” 35 “Or who has first given to him, and it will be repaid to him again?” 36 For of him, and through him, and to him are all things. To him be the glory for ever! Amen.
I.e., "only in the bible."
I earlier said:Or do you think seventeenth century scholars tend to be better informed than twentieth and twenty-first century scholars?
Sure. But the fact that you have chosen to dodge the question I asked tells me you know as well as I do that modern scholars - the guys who translated for modern versions of the Bible - knew much more than seventeenth century scholars.I think they knew more than you do now.
Modern scholars agree with me that all of Jesus' twelve disciples were Jews; they disagree with you.I think they know more than you do now.
The point is that modern scholars agree with me that all of Jesus' twelve disciples were Jews; they disagree with you.What's to drag.
I think that the whole point carries weight, and is valid.
So it is important we get his stuff right, so why are you not just acknowledging that modern scholars agree with me that all of Jesus' twelve disciples were Jews; they disagree with you.It's your eternity. Seems like a very important timescale.
And yet modern scholars agree with me that all of Jesus' twelve disciples were Jews; they disagree with you. Not me twisting it, Steve.You clearly don't understand anything, because you keep engaging in discussions where you twist our sacred book to mean whatever you want it to mean.
Because I am interested in the truth. Clearly you are not, given you refuse to acknowledge that modern scholars agree with me that all of Jesus' twelve disciples were Jews; they disagree with you.which is exactly why I stated---
You've made it quite clear that you don't actually want to know God.
So why are you wasting your time on this forum?
I am highlighting how Christians handle a truth they do not like. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that modern scholars agree with me that all of Jesus' twelve disciples were Jews and they disagree with you tells us a lot about the Christian approach to truth. If you do not like it, just ignore it.Why not go waste your time preaching to the choir of your fellow unbelievers who abandoned their previous beliefs, and convinced themselves that they are smarter than others who still believe in Jesus?