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

[Willum]

[Replying to post 120 by paarsurrey1]

Unless you have shown that Jesus mother was not a Jew, then you have not shown that Jesus was not a Jew.
If by saying he wasn't 'Jewish' you are saying he wasn't a Jew, then you may be mistaken.

I agree with one on the above.
Regards

Though I respect your opinion, I can't help but notice you have many times backed it up with nothing but your opinion.

I have shown that during the 4th century BC through the first century AD, Jews held that the father defined lineage. Just like the Bible describes Jesus ancestry from David.

I have shown NOWHERE in the Bible is lineage described by the mother, that is a human convention.

I have shown that either his father was Tiberius Panderia or God, one made his lineage non-Jewish, the other made his lineage, divine and non Jewish. Unless you somehow think that God's genes are recessive?

NO ONE HAS CONTRADICTED Deuteronomy. Which says that unless his birth was in wedlock, which it was not, then Jews would regard him as a bastard, and he would be excluded from the congregation of God.
No one has raised a single fact of Bible verse to the contrary.

Jesus was no Jew.

And certainly was the first Christian, in the same sense Mao was a Maoist.

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to post 113 by William]

Can it really be demonstrated that Jesus belonged to any religion? Is there any record of him saying he was a Jew or a Christian?

Historical analysis has rules. Explanations of historical data need to have explanatory scope and power, plausibility at the very least, probability more important, and simplicity (minimal ad hoc assumptions).

All the data testifies to him being Jewish and revering the O.T.

The theory that explains this in a way satisfying the above criteria is, he was a Jew and believed that he worshiped the same God as Moses, Jeremiah, Isaiah and all the rest.

Was he a Christian? That depends on much. If the definition of Christian is belief that Jesus was raised from the dead, then clearly he could not have been a Christian prior to the crucifixion. If Jesus was in fact raised from the dead, then he obviously believed so, and yes, that would make him a Christian based on the above definition.

All the data testifies to him* being Jewish and revering the O.T.

* Jesus

I agree with one on the above quote.
Regards

[Willum]

[Replying to post 122 by paarsurrey1]

Except that, and once again, it doesn't contain anything other than blanket statements and opinion.

Jesus was therefore not a Jew, and was, a Christian, just as the Pope is a Christian, and Mao is a Maoist.

Unless you can refute anything, you should, in honesty, concede this.

[otseng]

* Jesus

I agree with one on the above quote.
Regards

Moderator Comment

This can be construed as an unconstructive one-liner. To avoid this in the future, please explain why you agree.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[MuffMaYne]

[Replying to post 1 by paarsurrey1]

Jesus nor Paul created Christianity. Christianity started off as "The Way." or "People of the Way."

What does the word Christian mean to begin with?

a : one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ

Being a Christian just means you believe in Christ and Christianity just means you subscribe to that way or life or religion.

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to post 124 by otseng]
Sorry.
Jesus did not start a new religion called Christianity. Jesus followed Moses' teachings, his mother was Jewish.Whenever he went for formal worship, he went to a Jewish temple not to any other religion's temple. Jesus did not erect any temple for worship himself. That to me is enough proof of Jesus being a Jew.
Regards

[Willum]

[Replying to post 126 by paarsurrey1]

So we have shown you, Deuteronomy 23:2, that a child born out of wedlock would be excluded from the congregation of God. We have shown children born in the first century were defined by their father's lineage, by Jewish Law. We have shown there is no passage in the Bible dictating lineage. Jesus worshiped and prayed everywhere.

Also:

Do you have a lot of resurrection in the Mosaic Law?
Any adulterers forgiven?
Is there very much sin and redemption?
Are Christians kosher?
Do they work on the sabbath?
Are Jews allowed to venerate idols, such as the crucifix?

Just how many differences did Jesus need to bring to be completely different?

Jesus started a religion Christianity: In fact that is the verdict of history.

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to post 126 by paarsurrey1]

So we have shown you, Deuteronomy 23:2, that a child born out of wedlock would be excluded from the congregation of God. We have shown children born in the first century were defined by their father's lineage, by Jewish Law. We have shown there is no passage in the Bible dictating lineage. Jesus worshiped and prayed everywhere.

Also:

Do you have a lot of resurrection in the Mosaic Law?
Any adulterers forgiven?
Is there very much sin and redemption?
Are Christians kosher?
Do they work on the sabbath?
Are Jews allowed to venerate idols, such as the crucifix?

Just how many differences did Jesus need to bring to be completely different?

Jesus started a religion Christianity: In fact that is the verdict of history.

Jesus worshiped and prayed everywhere.

Name any other temple of any other religion than of the Jews where Jesus attended. please.
Regards

[Willum]

[Replying to post 128 by paarsurrey1]

As a rebel, everywhere he met was a temple or church to Christianity.
By the sea of Galilee, on the streets of Jerusalem, every whorehouse, warehouse, farmhouse, henhouse, outhouse and doghouse was where he could meet, everywhere else he would be unwelcome.

Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst."

Deuteronomy, Matthew, have you even read the Bible?
Is your argument really that other churches hadn't been built yet?

[AdHoc]

[Replying to post 95 by liamconnor]
It seems to me that you have a little case of sour grapes. I guess if you are going to snipe, that means you have to come off ignore.

[Replying to post 93 by AdHoc]

You're funny. Somehow I have to prove your illogical assumptions about God now... I have a hard enough time proving my own illogical assumptions. I certainly don't need to be burdened with yours.

Negative, the illogical assumption is a god had a baby with a mortal. This requires a genome. My default assumption is Jesus is a story. Alternatively, if I must assume he was a real person, people do exist after all, that he was the son to Pandara. Christians are the ones with the divine genome, I certainly can't be expected to prove a divine genome. That rests entirely on you. Since you can't...

I concede this point to you. You win.

You either can't refute my point or you completely missed it.

The rational refutation is that your religion requires breeding with a god. Do you think man and god are similar enough genetically to interbreed? an all powerful invisible entity can interbreed with man? You see a rational person, or one familiar with biology would dismiss this out of hand.

I don't want to question your use of probability but I think you may have been affirming the consequent here.

Are you sure there are no other Ps?

Also when you calculated your probabilities did you assume God exists or God doesn't exist?

No need to avoid the question. By all means, add any other means of insemination you like. I assumed a creature like God existed.

Yes, Deuteronomy does say what I think it does. It doesn't say what you want it to...

Really? What do I want it to say? Now who's erecting strawmen?

Yes, really - you want it to allow Jesus to be a saviour, Deuteronomy says that he is a bastard and accursed. Ultimately it boils down to conservative Jewish perception, God never gave them any convincing proof that he was their Saviour. Without definitive proof, they must reject him for their souls. If they are wrong they go against God.

Surely this principle must be easy enough to understand: Jesus was not convincing to the majority of the people he was supposed to save. If Jews were afraid to turn to him for their souls, then there is a major problem with the principles Jesus was forthcoming with.

Ah, well.

Maybe we should agree to disagree on these two points.

RE: Adultery

According to the bible Jesus had every right to forgive her because He is God.

According to the local authorities he was not acknowledge as God, therefore his opinion was as good as Billy Graham's. As to forgiving ONE person in history of a commandment, I believe even you can see how unjust that would be.

Effectively he said, stone every adulterer but this person. Though, since he is God as you believe, he said to stop punishing the crime of adultery, an entire commandment this devil abrogated!

But He didn't promote adultery and He didn't just forgive one person.

He said, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." and when they all left He said, "Then neither do I condemn you" and "Go now and leave your life of sin"

This is not promoting adultery.

Jesus didn't forgive just one person "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him"

So you refuse to tell me what Jesus said?

I should hope I wouldn't have to - it is amazing that I am always demonstrating the fallacy of the Bible to debaters here... religious people who worship via a book they don't even read or remotely understand.

This phrase has become a widely quoted summary of the relationship between Christianity, secular government, and society. The original message, coming in response to a question of whether it was lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar, gives rise to multiple possible interpretations about the circumstances under which it is desirable for the Christian to submit to earthly authority.

Was it lawful to pay tax to Caesar? If he represented a non-divine government, yes. However, as you so ineffectively denied, Caesar was a man-god, unlawful to venerate, according to the Commandments.

Sorry.

The coins themselves had graven images of false gods on them - unlawful even to touch.

Sorry.

They were to be given to the false God Caesar before you paid Yahweh, another violation of the commandments.

Sorry.

Finally, they were the form of worship that the false God Caesar wanted. You might sacrifice rams to Jehovah, but Caesar wanted coins. Venerating a false god, yet another violation of the commandments.

What is a boy to do?

As to Jesus' words:

Matthew 22:20-22
Mark 12:17

Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto divine Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto a divine God the things that are God's.

I am not surprised you are unfamiliar with the quote.

I can't help but notice you did not address the problem of Jesus being Jewish because a Jewish prophecy said so. Obviously it percolated to your mind that this was an obvious bit of vainglory. That God, alleged master of the universe, could not be conceived of being a racist, so a Jewish insertion the saviour of mankind is obviously not logical.

At least I've gotten you that far.

Where did you find your quote above? Here's the quote from the NIV and the context.

Mark 12:10-17
"Havent you read this passage of Scripture:

The stone the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone;

the Lord has done this,
and it is marvelous in our eyes?

Then the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders looked for a way to arrest him because they knew he had spoken the parable against them. But they were afraid of the crowd; so they left him and went away.

Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. They came to him and said, Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You arent swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not? Should we pay or shouldnt we?

But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. Why are you trying to trap me? he asked. Bring me a denarius and let me look at it. They brought the coin, and he asked them, Whose image is this? And whose inscription?

Caesars, they replied.

Then Jesus said to them, Give back to Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is Gods.

And they were amazed at him."

The god of the Pharisees was probably money and that's why they likely rejected Jesus. Jesus didn't serve money. He wanted what belonged to God.