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 150 by William]

So what are you trying to say?
That Jesus didn't endorse a graven image?
That he didn't endorse a foreign man-god?

Apologetic arguments!
Because he did, and demonstrating he was a Roman construct, and not a Jewish oriented one.

[William]

[Replying to post 150 by William]

So what are you trying to say?
That Jesus didn't endorse a graven image?
That he didn't endorse a foreign man-god?

Apologetic arguments!
Because he did, and demonstrating he was a Roman construct, and not a Jewish oriented one.

An interesting usage of wording there Willum.

What I am saying is that the fictional character which replaced the original was an Elitist Roman AND Elitist Jewish construction.

F0r some reason you want to leave out the Jewish part by pointing only at the Roman involvement.

If you want to make a point of it not being Jewish-oriented in your complaint here to do with using Roman money which had a graven image, you will have to acknowledge that during the Roman occupation of Palestine, Jews (elitists included) were using that money and paying taxes for using that money. Thus, not being very 'Jewish oriented' themselves.

The other side of that coin is how the Jews also set up a bridge between Judaism and Christianity in the form of practicing Christian Jews/Jewish Christians and by this were able to successful convince many that Christianity was legitimately 'a thing of the Jewish GOD', adding to the deception.

Bottom line, Jew or Gentile, it is really all about elitist agendas in relation to the human race...which some claim is just 'conspiracy theory' a handy phrase which enables those who use it to not have to answer the hard questions. They can thumb their noses with expressions such as 'I do not discuss or debate things which are obviously conspiracy theories'.
A strange excuse for the sake of diversion. They can discuss theories of GOD and of science, but practices of elitism in relation to either is taboo. "Sorry bud - that's in the conspiracy pile'.

The elitist agenda is no longer a hidden thing, and hasn't been for a long time now. It is not a matter of conspiracy theory. It is fact. Elitism exists and has an agenda.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 152 by William]

Agree to partially agree.
I rather think the Romans used the average Jews' inability to access their own scripture to replace it. Which is why the Isaiah prophesy describe the Caesars exactly.

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to paarsurrey1]

one thing is clear, Jewish sensibility can not accept Jesus as God in the flesh. So if Jesus was and remained a Jew he could not have thought of himself as God incarnate. Its just not Jewish.

Jesus was not God incarnate. It is stated the Jesus used to talk in parables. As per Bible, Jesus told the Jews that Jews were God/s so that is the sense in which he described himself as such. I understand that Pauline Christians took it incorrectly.

Regards

[Clownboat]

[Replying to paarsurrey1]

one thing is clear, Jewish sensibility can not accept Jesus as God in the flesh. So if Jesus was and remained a Jew he could not have thought of himself as God incarnate. Its just not Jewish.

Jesus was not God incarnate. It is stated the Jesus used to talk in parables. As per Bible, Jesus told the Jews that Jews were God/s so that is the sense in which he described himself as such. I understand that Pauline Christians took it incorrectly.

Regards

I think you might have meant, "they take it differently" than you, not 'incorrectly'.

I say this because the arrogance required for someone to think that they know the mind of this Jesus character that might have existed in history some 2,000 years ago would be staggering.

When there are 40,000 or so denominations of Christianity, this taking things differently should be expected.

[paarsurrey1]

[Replying to paarsurrey1]

one thing is clear, Jewish sensibility can not accept Jesus as God in the flesh. So if Jesus was and remained a Jew he could not have thought of himself as God incarnate. Its just not Jewish.

Jesus was not God incarnate. It is stated the Jesus used to talk in parables. As per Bible, Jesus told the Jews that Jews were God/s so that is the sense in which he described himself as such. I understand that Pauline Christians took it incorrectly.

Regards

I think you might have meant, "they take it differently" than you, not 'incorrectly'.

I say this because the arrogance required for someone to think that they know the mind of this Jesus character that might have existed in history some 2,000 years ago would be staggering.

When there are 40,000 or so denominations of Christianity, this taking things differently should be expected.

Sorry, for the wrong English and thanks for correcting me.
I meant the Christian understand it wrongly. Jesus was not a god or son of god.
Regards