"Jesus was a Jew"
Isaiah 63:16 "Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O LORD, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting."
Yahweh
The Jesus scriptures rest under the shade of this judaic overlord. Like Isaiah before him, Jesus's reported supplications are made to this focal entity within Judaism. Jesus must therefore be considered as Jewish, not simply by birthright but more fundamentally in both intellectual and outlook conditioning.
"Jesus was a Jew." Please Debate
"Jesus was a Jew"
Moderator: Moderators
-
brianbbs67
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #41
[Replying to post 38 by FWI]
Just an FWI, FWI. Inequity is mistranslated in most all places. Lawlessness or perversion (twisting) is what it should be. So, yes, by the law, 2 or 3 witnesses were needed to convict someone.
Just an FWI, FWI. Inequity is mistranslated in most all places. Lawlessness or perversion (twisting) is what it should be. So, yes, by the law, 2 or 3 witnesses were needed to convict someone.
Post #42
[Replying to post 40 by brianbbs67]
Thank you for your input. However, I didn't use the word inequity in my post. I used the word iniquity. Where, the discussion between Difflugia and myself was not related to a conviction or the laws in Deut. 17:6 and Heb. 10:28. The debate is related to the validity of a position and not necessarily a crime or an open sin. The intent of Deut. 19:15, 2 Cor. 13:1 and 1 Tim. 5:19 was used in combination to support my disagreement. I have not in any way suggested that Difflugia committed a crime to be convicted of by his position.
brianbbs67 wrote:Just an FWI, FWI. Inequity is mistranslated in most all places. Lawlessness or perversion (twisting) is what it should be. So, yes, by the law, 2 or 3 witnesses were needed to convict someone.
Thank you for your input. However, I didn't use the word inequity in my post. I used the word iniquity. Where, the discussion between Difflugia and myself was not related to a conviction or the laws in Deut. 17:6 and Heb. 10:28. The debate is related to the validity of a position and not necessarily a crime or an open sin. The intent of Deut. 19:15, 2 Cor. 13:1 and 1 Tim. 5:19 was used in combination to support my disagreement. I have not in any way suggested that Difflugia committed a crime to be convicted of by his position.
-
brianbbs67
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #43
Ah, ok, I apparently misunderstood. Sorry for that.FWI wrote: [Replying to post 40 by brianbbs67]
brianbbs67 wrote:Just an FWI, FWI. Inequity is mistranslated in most all places. Lawlessness or perversion (twisting) is what it should be. So, yes, by the law, 2 or 3 witnesses were needed to convict someone.
Thank you for your input. However, I didn't use the word inequity in my post. I used the word iniquity. Where, the discussion between Difflugia and myself was not related to a conviction or the laws in Deut. 17:6 and Heb. 10:28. The debate is related to the validity of a position and not necessarily a crime or an open sin. The intent of Deut. 19:15, 2 Cor. 13:1 and 1 Tim. 5:19 was used in combination to support my disagreement. I have not in any way suggested that Difflugia committed a crime to be convicted of by his position.
-
brianbbs67
- Guru
- Posts: 1871
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #44
I think I can add to the debate here. I am watching a documentary on the historical record of Jesus. One of the archeologist made an interesting statement. "Christianity is a religion about Jesus but Jesus' religion was Jewish"
