Jesus was not a Christian

[paarsurrey1]

Jesus was a Jew and he did not start a new religion called Christianity. Christianity was started by Paul and the Church. Right, please?
Regards

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to post 99 by paarsurrey1]

So you have said, and so I have gleaned. But you have not backed it up with anything.
I have shown you proof to the contrary.

Please refute what I have demonstrated or rescind your claim.

Jesus was a follower of Moses and his teachings.

"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill (Matthew 5:17).

The above is the correct teachings of Jesus and explains his mission. Right, please?
Regards

_______
https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/b ... n-gods-law

[Willum]

[Replying to post 101 by paarsurrey1]

No, no, no.
Observe as he does, not as he says.

Read me, please

Definitely disrespectful of Judaic law - but very respectful of Hellenic traditions. Not murdering adulterers, for example.

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to post 101 by paarsurrey1]

No, no, no.
Observe as he does, not as he says.

Read me, please

Definitely disrespectful of Judaic law - but very respectful of Hellenic traditions. Not murdering adulterers, for example.

No, no, no.
Observe as he does, not as he says.

Does one mean that Jesus actions were not true to his words, please?
Regards

[Willum]

[Replying to post 103 by paarsurrey1]

Answer the question.
The Bible says he was not.

Don't you agree?
Or can you invalidate the points I put out?

I don't think you can, so please don't play word-games, just say: You made some good observations, thank you!

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to post 103 by paarsurrey1]

Answer the question.
The Bible says he was not.

Don't you agree?
Or can you invalidate the points I put out?

I don't think you can, so please don't play word-games, just say: You made some good observations, thank you!

I will say Jesus was a truthful and straightforward man. If the narrators/scribes/clergy/church could not record things from Jesus correctly, it is their fault, no fault of Jesus, please.
Regards

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 105 by paarsurrey1]

I will say Jesus was a truthful and straightforward man. If the narrators/scribes/clergy/church could not record things from Jesus correctly, it is their fault, no fault of Jesus, please.

I'd just like a clarification please. Let's assume for the sake of argument that the scribes recorded Jesus correctly and accurately.
Did Jesus say the things he said thinking and believing them to be true, or did he say them (or some of them) knowing them to be false?
It is possible for a person to say things believing them to be true, when in fact, completely unbeknownst to them, they are not.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 105 by paarsurrey1]

Yes, I agree, they are less likely to misconstrue his actions than words.

Do I need to cite the portion of this OP that I wish you to answer again?

So, please answer my challenge, or say, "You're right, excellent points, I hadn't thought of that..."

[marco]

I will say Jesus was a truthful and straightforward man. If the narrators/scribes/clergy/church could not record things from Jesus correctly, it is their fault, no fault of Jesus, please.

The only way we know about Jesus is from narrators, scribes .... If we think they are at fault, then we cannot say Jesus was truthful. In fact we can say nothing about Jesus, given there is so much doubt.

Is there some other way of knowing details about Jesus?

[paarsurrey1]

I will say Jesus was a truthful and straightforward man. If the narrators/scribes/clergy/church could not record things from Jesus correctly, it is their fault, no fault of Jesus, please.

The only way we know about Jesus is from narrators, scribes .... If we think they are at fault, then we cannot say Jesus was truthful. In fact we can say nothing about Jesus, given there is so much doubt.

Is there some other way of knowing details about Jesus?

That doesn't mean that we should accept everything from narrators, scribes/clergy/church on blind-faith. Their descriptions must be open for investigation and scrutiny. Only that what is supported by reason and or Revelation is accepted to be truthful.
This is what Jesus did in case of Pharisees, Sadducees and the clergy belonging to Judaism in the temple and outside. We should follow Jesus' acts and teachings not what has been added later by Paul and his associates.

Regards

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to post 105 by paarsurrey1]

Yes, I agree, they are less likely to misconstrue his actions than words.

Do I need to cite the portion of this OP that I wish you to answer again?

So, please answer my challenge, or say, "You're right, excellent points, I hadn't thought of that..."

One may, please
Regards