The rest of the world is indeed in the illusion that they found what I am looking for, while there are many who wake from their slumber and fulfil the following prophecy:
Jeremiah 16:19 O LORD, my strength and my stronghold, And my refuge in the day of distress, To You the nations will come From the ends of the earth and say, “Our fathers have inherited nothing but falsehood, Futility and things of no profit.”
It is not I who rewrite the roadmap, but the Hellenistic Greek father, who Paganised the original pure Judaism of Jesus and his disciples and thus created their own roadmap, a path to destruction for generations that followed after them. Moreover, they forced everyone to this path by the sword. My quest is to rediscover the pure Judaism of Yeshua and those first disciples that followed him.
If you read the thread I gave expositions that clearly shows how the Greek church departed from the original teaching. Of course, by utilising Hellenistic ideas you can develop a doctrine they did. If you utilised other ideas you get something else.
However, the first century disciples did not have what we call the NT to develop doctrine from and therefore they worked from the Tanakh. They derived their definitions from the Tanakh.
Christians are often taught that the OT foreshadows the NT and the NT explains the OT, that is, it is impossible to understand the OT without the NT.
Utter nonsense. It is impossible to understand the NT without properly understanding the Tanakh, and you cannot understand it with Hellenistic ideas. You need to utilise Hebraic thought, figuratively you need to become a Jew if you want to understand Jewish writings.
The Hellenised Greek Christians, after they excommunicated the Jewish believers from their Gentile congregations after the Bar Kochba revolt, did not understand these Jewish writings and incorporated Platonism and Pagan ideas into their interpretation.
That will not happen, for it would require to side with a few sceptics. His non-existence is not the general consensus. Sorry to disappoint you.
What evidence do you have that Paul was against his own Jewish brethren?
Why would any Roman historians be interested to mention a poor Jewish teacher who got executed? They were interested in great men, not in someone they would have considered a looser.
Josephus's passage has been shown that trinitarians indeed tempered with it, but there is an Arabic translation of Josephus that has a more likely reading.
"At this time there was a wise man who wascalled Jesus. His conduct was good, and (he) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
I am not going to argue over whose version is right.
Of course, there was an expectation of the end of the age (not the world), for the time given by Daniel was near, so there was a very strong Messianic expectation. There were many false prophets that were all crucified, and then there was this Yeshua, who refused to lead an uprising against the Romans - and was also crucified.
Geza Vermes, a Jew, says about Yeshua that he thinks he was the greatest of Jewish prophets. I don't think he believes he was the Messiah because Judaism doesn't accept him because of Chrsistianity, but he did a lot of work to uncover the historical Yeshua and he says that now there is nothing that should stop Jews accepting his version of him, for he removed all Hellenistic twist from the story. What's left is a Hashidic Jewish teacher.
Well, politics... I am deeply a humanist. In my view the greatness of a country should not be measured by the mega-dollars its corporations make, but by the happiness of her people :-)
What we discuss here would be a very emotional issue for devote trinitarians. I lost my best friends simply because I told them I no longer believed that Jesus was God. A number of my friends were angry and shouting, jumping up and down. You cannot reason with people like these because their faith is not reasonable. It is based on acceptance of something set in stone in the 4th century.
AA and Rob are different, they are not emotionally attached to any belief system, so we can freely and intelligently discuss various ideas without feeling offended. I like that. On the international forums I have been told how off I was but no appropriate explanation given. I was told I should attend a few Sunday school sessions also. These can only come from people who don't have the ability to reason, so they resort to insults and belittling.
To be honest I understand them. They are being told that they virgin-born saviour Jesus is the Antichrist in whose name horrendous crimes were committed. I prove them that the Greek church fulfilled the prophecy about those departing the faith and adopting Pagan doctrine. That prophecy is clear-cut, even the blind can see. But they refuse to see it even though it is plain, black and white, and it is even taught in bible colleges.
This is why I wrote the warning in the beginning. I knew they were not interested to discuss it.
You are supposing that I alone represent this doctrine. Incorrect. Thanks to the Internet and the fast sharing of ideas this is the fastest growing religion on earth. There is a huge number of people who are searching for the original roots of the Christian faith because they are unsatisfied with the fairy tales of the Greeks. Some of them stop at rejecting the trinity, others reject other unfounded doctrines like the abrogation of the Torah and voluntarily take up full Torah observance. Others realise that Passover lamb was not a sin sacrifice, but a covenant sacrifice and reject the idea of Jesus' death being a sin sacrifice. I reject every invention of the Paganised Greek church and redevelop everything from ground up based on - not Phariseic, but -Jewish ideas. And surprise, surprise, the renewed covenant scriptures harmonise very well with the Tanakh.
There is an enormous number of manuscripts, fragments, miniscules, translations and quotations. It is the job of the textual criticism to try reconstruct the original readings. From what I learned and understand the text is in a very good shape.
4. It is true the Gnostics were influential in the second century, but my interest is rather in two independent groups, the Ebionites and the Adoptionists, that both believed that Jesus was a human being chosen by God and empowered by the Spirit, which Spirit departed from him on the cross. I may add the most widely read book in the early churches, "The Shepherd of Hermas" which testifies about the same theology.
5. Christianity didn't become attractive because they did not require conversion to Judaism. Judaism never required Gentiles to convert, it was always only an option. Gentiles could be considered righteous if they observed the Noahide laws. Hence, we find in the NT proselytes (those Gentiles who were converts to Judaism and God-fearers, who were righteous Gentiles, who observed the Noahide laws. Paul didn't build up a different system, this already existed in Judaism, just as his theology was also Pharisaic theology, but not the legalistic version taught in the first century.
6. While in Egypt Jews were influenced by Hellenism (see Philo), John in his gospel exhibits a more ancient theology, that is, God first created the Torah (derived from Gen. 1 "Let there be light"), and through the Torah He created the world. The New Testament theology is NOT Hellenistic, but trinitarian Christianity interprets it in a Hellenised way. Surprise, surprise, everyone is a heretic who doesn't follow their Hellenistic interpretation.
7. I have just recently been exposed to Preterist theology, which I don't quite understand yet. I know that much, that they believe the Kingdom was always meant to be spiritual, and all prophecies became fulfilled in 70AD. I am in the opinion that the Kingdom was conditional
Malachi 4: 4 Remember the teaching of my servant Moses, the statutes and ordinances that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel. 5 Lo, I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes. 6 He will turn the hearts of parents to their children and the hearts of children to their parents, lest I will come and strike the land with a curse.
Repentance is never forced. So if Elijah doesn't succeed, what will come? The curse. One of the curses of the Torah is exile. So in my view because of the unrepentant Jewish nation the Kingdom did not come. Exile came instead, and the Kingdom came in a spiritual sense.
First of all, I will not answer your points because these have something to do with the Jesus made up by the Greek church, in which I have no interest.
The Wikipedia article in interesting and I had read similar articles in the past, but I disagree with them in a number of points. I will only give you an few examples because it is getting late.
1. I don't believe in "Pauline Christianity". That didn't exist in the first century, and after the apostolic age the Greek church absorbed Hellenistic ideas and Pagan doctrines, therefore, it cannot be called Pauline Christianity. Paul taught Gentiles how to live in the covenant and his teaching is very much derived from the Tanakh. There was a confusion in the first century whether Gentile converts had to convert to Judaism for salvation (the Judaisers believes they had to), but the Jerusalem Council agreed with Paul.
2. Acts records that it was at Antioch that the disciples first called themselves "Christians". The term simply means "those belonging to the Messiah" of "Messianic". There was no "Christianity" in the sense we think about Christianity today. They were one of the sects within Judaism.
3. It is false that a resurrected Messiah is not acceptable to Judaism today. When Rabbi Schneerson died his followers expected him to rise on after three days. It is the Chabad movement that brought back to life the biblical interpretation system Rabbinic Judaism abandoned probably because of the Jesus movement. On the top, there is a belief in two Messiahs. If Israel is worthy, God will send Messiah ben Yosepf (this does not mean the literal descendant of Yosef), the Messiah after the manner of Joseph, who was betrayed by his brethren, then he was hidden from them, while he rose to great power, then he was revealed. So revealed, hidden and revealed again.
The second Messiah, whom God will send if the Jewish people are worthy, is Messiah ben David, in the manner of David, the conquering king.
First of all, we are supposed to discuss here biblical ideas, not slandering each other. This is a non-Christian behaviour.
Secondly, I do believe and follow the teaching of the renewed covenant scriptures incorrectly called NT. However, I do not follow it Hellenistic interpretation, and no, I don't need the fairy tales of the Sunday Schools. If you don't like the thread you don't have to participate on it, but belittling the other is not a proper response.
Evangelicals state the belief that the scriptures were inspired and error free in the originals. Well, we don't have the originals, so I use internal evidence to filter out some corruption, like comparing the miracles performed. Generally the scriptures are in a pretty good shape, as new manuscript discoveries seem to confirm the readings. Not a lot needs to be corrected, but I'd like to see the Syriac Sinaiticus being considered with greater weight. I wonder what would the text look like if the it was accepted that the scriptures were originally written in Hebrew (as there is a growing number of scholars that propose it) and translated into Greek and other languages.
We do have some idea about what the Hebrew gospel of Matthew sounded like as the church fathers sometimes quote from it. Supposedly it was used by the Ebionites who were formed by the disciples that escaped Jerusalem before its destruction and were led by Yeshua's brothers.
I do not follow the mainstream, so I am free to come to my own conclusions. If I am wrong, at least I cannot blame anyone but myself.
The first complete manuscript comes from the 4th century, before than we only have fragments with few verses and church father quotations.
Then we have other traditions, not only the Greek, for example, the Old Syriac and the Old Latin translations that don't quite match up with the Greek, especially the Syriac, for it reads that Joseph begat Jesus. I think I have already posted this, but here it is again from the Syriac Sinaitic of Matthew:
Matt. 1:16 "Jacob begat Joseph; Joseph, to whom was betrothed Mary the Virgin, begat Jesus, who is called the Christ."
Matt. 1:24-25 "When Joseph arose from his sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took his wife and she bore to him a son, and he called his name Jesus."
No, it cannot be. Yeshua is so incredibly Jewish that there is no overlapping. He taught pure Judaism in a brilliant manner.
The Greeks made him into one of their gods attributing Pagan miracles to him.
If you want to know for sure what Pagan miracles were attributed to him, you compare what he did with what the disciples did, for Yeshua indicated that they will be able to do the same, and ever greater works:
John 14:12 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father.
Did the apostles walk on water, turned water into wine, feed multitudes, quietened storms? They healed and raised the dead. Did I miss anything else? So this simple test will give us a pretty good filter about what stories we should hold suspect.
I believe Yeshua ben Yosef is the Messiah, yet I don't think for a moment that the Tanakh is wrong. You need to understand the ancient interpretation system to understand how the NT uses the Tanakh quotations and how Yeshua fulfilled those writings. The system is called PaRDeS and is extensively used in the NT:
I am in no way making anti-Christian points, but I do point out where those so-called Christians went wrong who hijacked the ancient teaching about Yeshua and made him into one like their other Pagan gods and developed a theology by incorporating Hellenistic ideas.
Do I understand correctly? You stated that it is Pharisaic Judaism that has the doctrines of demons. So I pointed you to the very verse that prophesies that Christians will adopt those doctrines, and you did not think it was worth answering it?
Hmmm.... You don't seem to care about what is written in the bible...
What ground do you have to make that statement? This is slanderous. You need to watch your tongue as James says...
This verse doesn't identify the preaching of the cross with the gospel. There are two preachings mentioned.
1. The preaching of the gospel of the Kingdom of God 2. The preaching of the cross of Christ
The same is said in the verse I quoted from Paul, here it is again:
Romans 16: 25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past
Do you deny Paul differentiates between the gospel and the preaching of Jesus? What do you thing the "and" means in the verse?
Of course, there is.
Lev. 4: 3 if the anointed priest sins so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer to the LORD a bull without defect as a sin offering for the sin he has committed.
You might be one of the few Christians who don't understand this.
Can you actually read these verses by taking your theological glasses off?
It was Jesus' life of faithfulness ending in death that mattered, not his death alone. He only died because the Jewish religious leaders were corrupt at that time. It was God's will that he would be faithful unto death and thus qualify to become the second Adam. His death is only meaningful in that context. Therefore, his death was a self-sacrifice on the altar of faith, not a sin sacrifice. The removal of sin is the outcome for those who mimic his life of faithfulness and walk as he himself also walked, ie faithfully obey God as he did. It has absolutely no effect on Christians who live as they please and think they have to do absolutely nothing.
1 John 2:6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.
Have a look at the Revelation passage you quoted. It said he overcame, but Revelation also calls all other disciples to overcome. This means you must live like he did - be faithful unto death.
To a degree he is right. I do not believe the other guy had the Spirit of God. It was only given for a brief period of time before the end, as Joel prophesied it.
I cannot speak for anyone, only for myself.
1. I was raised as a strict atheist, I didn't believe in any supernatural. 2. I practiced Zen meditation while practising karate 3. I was reading Eastern philosophical books and I loved them 4. My best friend was a Muslim 5. When I attended a bible study for the sake of a girl I could hardly contain my laughter. 6. Then I was immersed in economy, then in Nostradamus 7. The I was very intensely drawn to the bible and ended with belief in God before having any connections with Christians or attended church meetings. 8. Zealously studied Christian theology, loved it, I was over the moon I found it so exciting and interesting, but they throw the whole lot out the window and redeveloped it from ground up.
I am not claiming I am right. But I was not born into this religion, I did not inherit it. It is the result of my own intellectual search and studies.
You can take it or leave it, what you do with it is none of my business.
revealer24 Forum Posts (985)
Has the Antichrist come?
The rest of the world is indeed in the illusion that they found what I am looking for, while there are many who wake from their slumber and fulfil the following prophecy:Jeremiah 16:19 O LORD, my strength and my stronghold,
And my refuge in the day of distress,
To You the nations will come
From the ends of the earth and say,
“Our fathers have inherited nothing but falsehood,
Futility and things of no profit.”
It is not I who rewrite the roadmap, but the Hellenistic Greek father, who Paganised the original pure Judaism of Jesus and his disciples and thus created their own roadmap, a path to destruction for generations that followed after them. Moreover, they forced everyone to this path by the sword. My quest is to rediscover the pure Judaism of Yeshua and those first disciples that followed him.