If Ze-us came back, would you believe?

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
Slojodan	If Ze-us came back, would you believe?	Lead	[-]
Posts: 170 (04/08/07 17:21:51) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Tags : None Hey guys, Was just talking about this with some friends. If sometime in the near future, Jesus did return, coming with the clouds of heaven, and setting up a kingdom here on earth, would you become Messianic Jews? Or would you assume it's a trick or test of faith, and keep denying him? What would it take for you to actually believe?
Netanel	Re: If Jesus came back, would you believe?	#1	[-]
Posts: 1828 (04/10/07 19:38:13) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Torah doesn't change. I asked for strength, and G-d gave difficulties to make me strong. I asked for wisdom, and G-d gave me problems to solve. I asked for prosperity, and G-d gave me brawn and brain to work. I asked for courage, and G-d gave me dangers to overcome. I asked for love, and G-d gave me troubled people to help. I asked for favors, and G-d gave me opportunities. I received nothing I wanted. I received everything I needed. My prayers were answered.
Sophiee1	Only if Elvis was with him	#2	[-]
Posts: 12970 (04/10/07 19:47:44) Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Unless everything G-d said in the Torah was a lie it ain't gonna happen. So the question is like asking "what would you do if the moon was made of of green cheese." Jsus, if he ever existed, was not a messiah per the Greek Text itself. Jsus was also not a god per the Greek Text itself, not to mention Torah. G-d is unchanging. Its right there in Torah, not to mention 'nach: *Quote:* I HaShem do not change Malachai 3:6 Before Me no god was formed, nor will there be one after Me. I, even I, am HaShem, and besides Me there is no Savior. Isaiah 43:11 I am the first and I am the last; apart from Me there is no G-d! Isaiah 44:6 I am HaShem, and there is no other; besides Me there is no G-d; Isaiah 45:5 Remember the first things of old, that I am G-d and there is no other; I am G-d and there is none like Me. Isaiah 46:9 And *Quote:* Exodus 3:14. G-d said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" This is often mistranslated as, "I Am Who I Am," but that is not a very good translation. The term Ehyeh is a first person future tense conjugation of the verb "to be." So Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh translated should read: "I will be what I will be" This clearly says that G-d is as He will be. He is unchanging. He will be in the future exactly as He was to Moses. He is not a man and He will never be a man. So we have statement after statement clearly saying G-d is not a man and never will be one. We have clear statements saying G-d does not change. He is what He is. He will be what He will be. Go back a few lines in Exodus 3. G-d says: *Quote:* Exodus 3:6. And He said, "I am the G-d of your father, the G-d of Abraham, the G-d of Isaac, and the G-d of Jacob." Then we have: *Quote:* Exodus 3:15 15. And G-d said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, HaShem G-d of your forefathers, the G-d of Abraham, the G-d of Isaac, and the G-d of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation." But perhaps the most important part comes next. G-d has just told us He is the G-d of the past the G-d of our fathers. The G-d of Abraham, of Isaac, of Jacob. He has then told us He is the G-d of the future I will be what I will be. This is my name FOREVER. This is how I should be mentioned in every generation. His name FOREVER. J-sus was a god they did not know (Deuteronomy 13) a god who was a man (G-d is not a man) and a god with a different name (J-sus). Not J-sus. Not a man-god. G-d is not a man. G-d is unchanging. *Quote:* Deuteronomy 32:39, See now that I myself am He! There is no god except Me . . This is His name forever. This shows clearly that G-d will NEVER be a man. And lest you have any doubts left: *Quote:* "I am HaShem; that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another" (Isaiah 42:7). G-d is the Supreme Being, and there is none other besides Him! Deuteronomy 4:35 HaShem, He is G-d in heaven above and on the earth below; there is no other! Deuteronomy 4:39 There is none beside You; neither is there any Rock like our G-d. 1 Samuel 2:2 You alone, O L-rd, are G-d 2 Kings 19:19 Before Me no god was formed, nor will there be one after Me. I, even I, am HaShem, and besides Me there is no Savior. Isaiah 43:11 And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
danny31	oh?	#3	[-]
Posts: 72 (04/10/07 22:58:08) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	So anyone telling you, "our prophet performed miracles, and many people witnessed it"? Well, if they are, ask them if G-d spoke to millions of people when creating their religion or are they just relying on the fact that one man says that G-d spoke to him. Well they might have very well performed miracles! After all read the Torah (Deuteronomy 13:1-5): 13:1 Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it. 13:2 If there will arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of a dream, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, 13:3 and the sign or the wonder of which he spoke to you happens, [and he] says, "Let us go after other gods which you have not known, and let us worship them," 13:4 you shall not heed the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of a dream; for the L-rd, your G-d, is testing you, to know whether you really love the L-rd, your G-d, with all your heart and with all your soul. 13:5 You shall follow the L-rd, your G-d, fear Him, keep His commandments, heed His voice, worship Him, and cleave to Him. So let us see, a guy comes along and says that his "prophet" named Jesus or Mohammad comes along and in violation of the verse 1, subtracts from the law, saying we no longer should follow the Torah, but instead follow their books, and to show "proof" because they perform a "miracle". After reading the above verse, can you do anything but laugh at them? I mean, G-d describes it at a very simple level to us! ">defendingjudaism.blogspot...l
Tom1992	If sometime in the near future	#4	[-]
Posts: 156 (04/11/07 01:48:28) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hello Slojodan, *Quote:* Hey guys, Was just talking about this with some friends. If sometime in the near future, Jesus did return, coming with the clouds of heaven, and setting up a kingdom here on earth, would you become Messianic Jews? Or would you assume it's a trick or test of faith, and keep denying him? What would it take for you to actually believe? If someone fulfills all the Messianic prophecies, he is the Mashiach. It's really as simple as that. And does it really matter what his name will be?
Douggg	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#5	[-]
Posts: 2736 (04/11/07 04:59:19) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hi Sophiee, The term Ehyeh is a first person future tense conjugation of the verb "to be." So Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh translated should read: "I will be what I will be" Jesus said (paraphrased) that before Abraham was "I am" - meaning a state of being God. Otherwise they wouldn't have wanted to kill him, as it says, right at that point. Now if the Lord, who spoke to Moses from the burning bush, did indeed say 'I will be what I will be" that would mean that he would become....? Become who or what future of Moses and from that time forward once He becomes? In my view, when the Lord spoke to Moses from the burning bush, He was referring to the day when He would enter the world the Lord from Heaven to become the second Adam (1Corthians15:47.....The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven)- the God-man, the unique Son of God. To me, if indeed 'I will be what I will be" is what the Lord said from the burning bush, and later Jesus said "I am", that would be the fulfillment and mystery of "I will be what I will be" as the Lord from Heaven entering this world as Jesus. Futhermore, I don't see as the son of Mary, Jesus as a man existing prior to being born (in 1Corthinians15:45 above, even the first man is Adam), because Mary didn't exist. But as the Lord from heaven - the in-form, even before Jesus, emanation of the Father, the invisible God, to all of creation who's back even Moses saw on Mt. Sinai, before entering this world - yes definitely. Peace, Doug L.
Netanel	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#6	[-]
Posts: 1828 (04/11/07 10:35:43) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Doug, *Quote:* Jesus said (paraphrased) that before Abraham was "I am" - meaning a state of being God. Otherwise they wouldn't have wanted to kill him, as it says, right at that point. If Jsus existed at all, he is quoted as misquoting the Hebrew Torah and Tanach in the GT. Nothing he claimed is relevent to Judaism, nor is anything he said credible to Judaism. Take away the name Jsus and substitute any name, attribute all the deeds attributed to Jsus in the GT to him, and he would still be nothing of worth or relevence to Judaism. *Quote:* Now if the Lord, who spoke to Moses from the burning bush, did indeed say 'I will be what I will be" that would mean that he would become....? Become who or what future of Moses and from that time forward once He becomes? No, it doesn't mean He will become something else, it means that what He is now, what He was before anything existed, and what He will be when nothing else exists is the same. *Quote:* In my view, when the Lord spoke to Moses from the burning bush, He was referring to the day when He would enter the world the Lord from Heaven to become the second Adam (1Corthians15:47.....The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven)- the God-man, the unique Son of God. This is the second time I've seen you use this quote, and once again you are doctoring the quote to add your own bias. Nothing in that quote claims "spiritual man" to be a god, nor the unique son of a god. The funny thing is the quote itself says flat out that "the spiritual man did not come first", and thus any attempt to connect this to Jsus and also claim that Jsus existed before man is clearly contradictory. As it is with most Chrstian theology and dogma. *Quote:* To me, if indeed 'I will be what I will be" is what the Lord said from the burning bush, and later Jesus said "I am", that would be the fulfillment and mystery of "I will be what I will be" as the Lord from Heaven entering this world as Jesus. All I can say to pipe dreams like this is I hope you have familiarized yourself with the curses involved in altering and purposely misinterpreting the Torah to say things it clearly does not say. They will have to eventually deal with the crimes they have committed against G-d's Torah, and against others in misleading them in regards to G-d's Torah. *Quote:* Futhermore, I don't see as the son of Mary, Jesus as a man existing prior to being born (in 1Corthinians15:45 above, even the first man is Adam), because Mary didn't exist. But as the Lord from heaven - the in-form, even before Jesus, emanation of the Father, the invisible God, to all of creation who's back even Moses saw on Mt. Sinai, before entering this world - yes definitely. Definitely wrong. G-d is not a man, nor the form of a man, nor any other bogus attempt to insert Jsus into Israelite history. The truth is, if the guy ever existed, he supposedly was executed as a criminal by the Romans after about 30 years, advocated breaking the Torah, couldn't quote the Torah or prophets properly, advocated the stealing of donkeys and pigs, and on and on. Any attempt to connect Jsus to G-d is futile from the get go. No idolater can come along and contradict basic facts about Hashem, which He makes clear throughout the Torah. I asked for strength, and G-d gave difficulties to make me strong. I asked for wisdom, and G-d gave me problems to solve. I asked for prosperity, and G-d gave me brawn and brain to work. I asked for courage, and G-d gave me dangers to overcome. I asked for love, and G-d gave me troubled people to help. I asked for favors, and G-d gave me opportunities. I received nothing I wanted. I received everything I needed. My prayers were answered.
Sophiee1	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#7	[-]
Posts: 12970 (04/11/07 10:51:06) Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Dougg, if Jsus ever lived at all the story of the Jews wanting him dead is so full of nonsense it had to have been made up to convince people that the Jews were the "bad guys." It doesn't matter what the GT claims if it contradicts Torah -- and clearly it does. G-d doesn't say "I am" as you state Jsus claimed. Torah says G-d stated "I will be what I will be" -- meaning He is as He was as He will be. Unchanging. Torah says "If you did not know this god at Sinai it is a false god." Jsus wasn't the god we knew at Sinai. Torah tells you, Dougg, if you'd just read it rather than gleaning it for proof texts. Claiming to be a messiah was not a criminal offense in Judah. Hey, they were a "dime a dozen." The Sanhedrin had lost the right to pass death sentences (both via the Romans and via the Chamber of Hewn Stones being destroyed) The Sanhedrin never met at night. There have to be at least two eyewitnesses to a crime (and claiming to be messiah isn't a crime) and after a fair trial. Per the GT Jsus was not brought to the Sanhedrin, but to the father-in-law of a head Sadducee who was not part of the judicial branch. Ergo per the GT itself they had no legal rights to pass any kind of judgment. John 18:31 admits as much: *Quote:* "But we have no right to execute anyone," the Jews objected Keep in mind that the Saducee in charge got there by bribing all of the right people. He was a friend of Rome and was paying Pilate and keeping him happy. Here is an interesting article on the subject by Hugh Fogleman *Quote:* Before listing the contradictions regarding the trials of Jsus, one should be advised that the whole episode is only a fabrication. Anyone familiar with Jewish law recognizes the impossibility of the chief priests and scribes arresting Jsus and assembling to question him during the most holy of Jewish festivalsPassover. 1. Where was Jsus taken immediately after his arrest? a. Matthew, Mark and Luke say that Jsus was taken directly to the high priest (Matthew 26:57, Mark 14:53 and Luke 22:54). b. John says that Jsus was taken first to Annas, the father-in-law of the high priest (John 18:13) who, after an indeterminate period of time, sent Jsus to the high priest (John 18:24). 2. When did the priests and scribes gather together to question Jsus? a. Matthew 26:57 says that on the night Jsus was arrested the priests and scribes were gathered together prior to Jsus being brought to the high priest. b. Mark 14:53 says the priests and scribes gathered together on the night of Jsus' arrest after Jsus was brought to the high priest. c. Luke 22:66 says the priests and scribes assembled the day after Jsus was arrested. d. John mentions only the high priest - no other priests or scribes play a role in questioning Jsus. 3. Was Jsus questioned by Herod? a. Luke says that Pilate sent Jsus to Herod who questioned Jsus at length and then returned Jesus to Pilate (Luke 23:7-11). b. Matthew, Mark and John make no mention of Herod. This, in itself, means nothing, but it brings about another contradiction later. 4. Who was responsible for Jsus' death, Pilate or the Jews? The gospel writers go to every conceivable length to absolve the Romans in general, and Pilate in particular, of Jesus' crucifixion and to blame it on the Jews. The reason, of course, was that Chrstianity was going to have to exist under Roman rule for many years, which is why the New Testament contains nothing critical of the Romans, even though they were hated for their heavy taxation, and Pilate was hated for his brutality. For the church, the Jews made an appropriate scapegoat because the Jews were a thorn in side of the early church. The Jews, of course, had far greater knowledge of Jewish laws and traditions than the largely gentile church, and were able to call attention to some of the errors being taught by the church. The Biblical account of Pilate's offer to release Jsus but the Jews demanding the release of Barabbas is pure fiction, containing both contradictions and historical inaccuracies. a. What had Barabbas done? 1. Mark 15:7 and Luke 23:19 say that Barabbas was guilty of insurrection and murder. 2. John 18:40 says that Barabbas was a robber. b. Pilate's "custom" of releasing a prisoner at Passover. This is pure invention - the only authority given by Rome to a Roman governor in situations like this was postponement of execution until after the religious festival. Release was out of the question. It is included in the gospels for the sole purpose of further removing blame for Jsus' death from Pilate and placing it on the Jews. c. Pilate gives in to the mob. The gospels have Pilate giving in to an unruly mob. This is ridiculous in light of Pilate's previous and subsequent history. Josephus tells us that Pilate's method of crowd control was to send his soldiers into the mob and beat them (often killing them) into submission. This peaceful loving Pilate was eventually recalled to Rome because of his brutality. And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
Douggg	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#8	[-]
Posts: 2736 (04/11/07 11:54:12) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hi Sophiee, Dougg, if Jsus ever lived at all the story of the Jews wanting him dead is so full of nonsense it had to have been made up to convince people that the Jews were the "bad guys." In the nt, it is very clear the the Jews were split over Jesus. Some for. Some against. So there is no conspiracy to broad brush paint every Jew as being bad within the gospels themselfs. I don't disagree that historically and presently within certain Christian circles the Jews are painted negatively, though. The pharisees, those of the pharisees who were against him - yes, they were the "bad guys". Can we agree that it was only certain Jews who wanted to put Jesus to death and bring him to the Romans, because they themselves didn't have the authority? That's what you seem to be saying. I am agreeing with you, Sophiee, in a way, if you will let me. But somebody in the religious organization of the Jews back then did plot and conspire to have Jesus put to death... and not for just proclaiming that he was the messiah. As you say...Claiming to be a messiah was not a criminal offense in Judah. Hey, they were a "dime a dozen." Peace, Doug L.
mark	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#9	[-]
Posts: 1124 (04/11/07 12:18:49) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Douggg: Futhermore, I don't see as the son of Mary, Jesus as a man existing prior to being born... But as the... emanation of the Father... yes definitely. Douggg, I don't always see eye-to-eye with you, brother, but I just wanted to say - AMEN! In other words - well said. Netanel: Definitely wrong. G-d is not a man, nor the form of a man... Yes, I know... nor a burning bush, nor a pillar of fire. Peace
Douggg	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#10	[-]
Posts: 2736 (04/11/07 12:22:58) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hi Sophiee, It doesn't matter what the GT claims if it contradicts Torah -- and clearly it does. G-d doesn't say "I am" as you state Jsus claimed. Torah says G-d stated "I will be what I will be" -- meaning He is as He was as He will be. Unchanging. Torah says "If you did not know this god at Sinai it is a false god." Jsus wasn't the god we knew at Sinai. I don't think you are understanding what I am saying. When Jesus said "I am", it was not being a quote from the Torah as you are thinking, but the fulfillment to "I will be what I will be". To illustrate. If a young Jewish man were studying to become a rabbi, and said - I will be what I will be, meaning that someday after all of his studying is done what he will be is a rabbi - and thereafter he will always be a rabbi... again, I will be what I will be. His identity as being a man never changed, right? I am not saying that a Jew would ever utter those precise words for obvious reasons, but I am trying to illustrate the point that the Lord's answer to Moses was a prophecy - I will be what I will be - of the Lord entering the world as Jesus, Lord and Saviour - I am - the fulfillment. Peace, Doug L.
Douggg	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#11	[-]
Posts: 2736 (04/11/07 12:54:13) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hi Netanel, Exodus 3:13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? The Lord gave a prophecy as his name. "I will be what I will be". Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images. Jesus never prayed to the Lord, but always the Father... because he himself was the Lord from heaven (1Corinthians15:47). Peace, Doug L.
Sophiee1	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#12	[-]
Posts: 12970 (04/11/07 16:27:52) Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Dougg, the GT is very anti-Jewish. The only "good" Jews are the ones who are Xians! It is clear to an educated Jew who reads the GT that it was written either by non-Jews or by very poorly educated Jews. Don't forget the Essene sect who claimed Paul was a convert to Judaism and only so because he wanted to marry a priest's daughter. The GT is forever contradicting Torah and the "I am" quote is a perfect example. You said: *Quote:* I don't think you are understanding what I am saying. When Jsus said "I am", it was not being a quote from the Torah as you are thinking, but the fulfillment to "I will be what I will be". No doubt that is what the GT author had in mind, but they and you lack basic Hebraic knowledge. That was my point earlier when I mentioned that in Exodus 3 G-d says "this is my name FOREVER." I note you continue to ignore this not minor part of the statement. The concept of "I will be what I will be" means that G-d is unchanging, not that later he will morph into a power ranger man-god that is different. It means He has absolute existence and is unchanging. He is outside of time and space. As for Jsus praying to the father and not to a god -- if he prayed to anyone other than himself he was praying to another god. We've already given you the quotes, Dougg. The Tanach makes it clear that G-d is not a man and that G-d is unchanging. It little matters what your GT says since it contradicts the eternal word of G-d. You might as well believe the Koran or Book of Mormon. Or Harry Potter for that matter. Jsus spoke of his Father in heaven as his god -- most definitely not the same entity. John 20:17. *Quote:* John 20:17 Jsus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my G-d and your G-d.' " My father. MY G-d. Not "me" Dougg, but "MY G-D." And YOUR G-d. Jsus said many times that G-d was superior to him John 14:28: *Quote:* John 14: 28 "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. If the father is greater than Jsus then ipso facto he ISN'T Jsus. Take a look at Matthew 20:23 and Mark 13:32 as well. And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
Sophiee1	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#13	[-]
Posts: 12970 (04/11/07 16:44:57) Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	BTW Dougg if Jsus was a god, how could Satan tempt him? And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
mark	Re: What's with the title change?	#14	[-]
Posts: 1124 (04/11/07 17:45:07) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Sophiee, What's the deal with the title change? How can the name "Jesus" be inherently more evil than "Zeus"? I'm just curious to see what logic you will employ to explain this one (not that you owe me an explanation). And by the way, the last time I asked you about Zeus, you appealed to some unbiblical tradition that it had something to do with the fact that "nobody worships Zeus today". Putting aside the astounding il-logic of that reasoning for the moment, I feel that you should know (so that you don't go on breaking this law) that Zeus-worship is alive and well today. Here is one sample article. You can easily find more. Is it just possible that you despise everything that Jesus (and I mean the Jesus of the canonical gospels, and not some hypothetical, historical invention) represents? Go on - admit it. It's true. You have hair-trigger sensitivity to Jesus - or more to the point, against Him. Well, like I said, you don't owe me any explanation. It's your board.
Sophiee1	Re: What's with the title change?	#15	[-]
Posts: 12970 (04/11/07 18:26:49) Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Mark, first kindly keep the rules in mind, particularly: 1. Treat others with respect. Posts that are deemed otherwise will be edited if possible or removed without explanation. Do you think your last post was respectful? As for the name change -- I did it to make a point. The point being that to a Xian the idea of Ze-us returning is ridiculous. The idea of Jsus being the messiah and "returning" if he ever existed at all is likewise ridiculous. He, as presented in Xian texts, in no way fit any messianic criteria let alone that of being a god. Your post indicated that I have a hair trigger sensitivity to Jsus. That is actually funny considering how much time I spend doing counter-missionary work. Your post indicates that it is you that has a very sensitive spot when your man-god is contrasted to other gods of similar mythologies. And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
mark	Re: What's with the title change?	#16	[-]
Posts: 1124 (04/11/07 20:12:13) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Sophiee1: Do you think your last post was respectful? No, it was not necessarily respectful, but I don't think it was disrespectful either. But it was critical. And there's a difference. Actually, it may have been unnecessarily poignant, considering you took the completely unexpected course of action of actually going back and changing the title again. But it's not like I haven't tried before. So hopefully you can understand my "going straight for the jugular", philosophically speaking. I had ample precedent. Still, I didn't mean to hurt you personally. I'm sorry if I did that. I'll be more careful. Sophiee1: Your post indicates that it is you that has a very sensitive spot when your man-god is contrasted to other gods of similar mythologies. Absolutely true. Peace
pninah1	Re: What's with the title change?	#17	[-]
Posts: 2135 (04/12/07 05:28:21) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	*Quote:* Is it just possible that you despise everything that Jesus (and I mean the Jesus of the canonical gospels, and not some hypothetical, historical invention) represents? Go on - admit it. It's true. You have hair-trigger sensitivity to Jesus - or more to the point, against Him. mark, it is hard to have any feelings one way or the other about someone in which there is no evidence that they even existed. how many fictional characters are you against or do you have a hair-trigger sensitivity to? as far a ze-z goes? there are no ze-z followers attempting to convert jews. and i doubt that there will be. however, what your religion represents, the worship of this man-god and the need to convert jews, is death for a jew. in fact, throughout history, xianity has represented death for a jew either literally or spiritually. and you want us to embrace it? the man-god is irrelevant to jews unless the followers of this man-god attempt to steal jewish souls. as xians here have been told many times: go worship your xian man-god but leave jews alone to worship the one true G-d of israel. once again, the xian man-god is irrelevant to jews. it is those of you who insist that jews worship him that is relevant.
Netanel	Re: What's with the title change?	#18	[-]
Posts: 1828 (04/12/07 08:29:44) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	mark, *Quote:* What's the deal with the title change? How can the name "Jesus" be inherently more evil than "Zeus"? I'm just curious to see what logic you will employ to explain this one (not that you owe me an explanation). I think one of the points Sophiee is trying to get accross is that you can substitute the name of any idol or perceived god in place of Jsus. Judaism doesn't seperate false idols by the degree of their falseness, they are all in the same boat, which is forbidden and contradictory to Torah. *Quote:* And by the way, the last time I asked you about Zeus, you appealed to some unbiblical tradition that it had something to do with the fact that "nobody worships Zeus today". Putting aside the astounding il-logic of that reasoning for the moment, I feel that you should know (so that you don't go on breaking this law) that Zeus-worship is alive and well today. Sophiee wrote neither Jsus nor Z-us uninterrupted. She is treating them both the same, as false gods. There is no distinction between them in their threat to a Jew. *Quote:* Is it just possible that you despise everything that Jesus (and I mean the Jesus of the canonical gospels, and not some hypothetical, historical invention) represents? Sophiee personally has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Furthermore, as often and as heavily as these boards are bombarded with proselytization and extreme misquotes and mistranslations of the Torah and the rest of the Nach, I don't think it can be claimed that any of the moderators have a hair-trigger sensitivity on the issue of Jsus. What it all comes down to is there is only one G-d in Judaism. Not a man, not a guy living on Olympus that turns into ducks, nor a man that died 2,000 years ago in Jerusalem. Name any idol or god from any surrounding nation and the story does not change, just as Sophiee illustrated with the thread title change. I asked for strength, and G-d gave difficulties to make me strong. I asked for wisdom, and G-d gave me problems to solve. I asked for prosperity, and G-d gave me brawn and brain to work. I asked for courage, and G-d gave me dangers to overcome. I asked for love, and G-d gave me troubled people to help. I asked for favors, and G-d gave me opportunities. I received nothing I wanted. I received everything I needed. My prayers were answered.
Medini	Re: Only if Elvis was with him	#19	[-]
Posts: 288 (04/12/07 09:22:30) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	I dont have much time to participate in this but I would like to remind the reader here that both Doug and Mark are voicing the same arguments that we have dealt with many times already here arguments that prove conclusively that their God is finite, and must be rejected by the Jew as an idol, and not the One bound by no essential or existential constraints, the Ehyeh asher Ekyeh as properly understood. Emanation is a physical metaphor that, by its spatial exteriority of the emanated from the emanator, means that its application to G-d, to Whom space does dont apply, can only be understood logically in terms of the ontological otherness of the emanated to the Emanator hence, the Son or Lord is not just not the Father, but cannot be God in being or essence either. Also, the question must arise whether the emanation of the Son or Lord is a truly free act by the invisible God or Father. If it is a truly free act, then the Son or Lord exists ex nihilo since only an ex nihilo act is truly free, being constrained by nothing. In such a case, if the Son or Lord is God, then you have something that is existentially finite in the most basic sort of way existing ex nihilo - as God. But if it is not a truly free act, if the Father or invisible God has no choice but to act in that way, if there is some inherency of that emanation in his essence, then the Father or invisible God himself is constrained and finite in his very essence, and you again have a finite for God.
Proteus	Re: What's with the title change?	#20	[-]
Posts: 1870 (04/12/07 09:46:01) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Responding to the first post only: Um, ugh, ugh! (And I'm a Christian!) Having been away a few days, I did not get to observe the name change. Thank you, Sophiee, for explaining. P.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

If Ze-us came back, would you believe?

If Ze-us came back, would you believe?

Quick Reply