Was Jesus really who the Bible says he was OR

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Why were there only men in the 5000…(Mark 6:44) wasn't he preaching to women…was he a mysoginist like Paul (1 Cor 14:34) or the strict Jew who threw out the moneychangers in the Temple; Juxtapose this with the major Christian denominations today that have their own banks charging usury This would go a long way to show that Jesus wasn’t here to start a new Cult (as the Romans later called Christian jews) but in fact was an Essene who kept apart from women.

The word misogynistic is not used correctly in the understanding of the Hebrew belief. There was no hatred inferred or practiced in either Jesus or Paul towards women. You must remember that both Jesus and Paul obeyed the Hebrew understanding of their covenant with God through Moses. The new covenant had not as yet been revealed till Jesus died and had shed His blood for the new covenant.

Men were given the task as to rule all creation including women. You can see this in Genesis 3:16----

Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

I realize that some will insist that this only means in marriage but through the entire OT scriptures it is said many times that this was indeed meaning all males and females. This was a cultural teaching and belief. This spilled over into every aspect of their existence including their synagogues and all religious matters and was in practice as Jesus and Paul came upon the scene.

But this had nothing to do with hatred or misuse of the female. Not saying that it did not occur at times but it was not accepted to mistreat any female. It was considered ungodly to mistreat any living creature. Women were not expected to attend teaching of Torah. The husband was to learn and teach his own family. Women were allowed to the Jerusalem Temple Court but were still separated from the men. In this instance (Mark 6:44) it was a private teaching of doctrine and
and not a public forum.

1st Corinthians 14:34 was after Jesus died and the Christian Jews formed their own Christian synagogues (Churches). Their liturgy was entirely Hebrew and still adhered to Mosaic Law. This was transformation period within the church from Hebrew to Greek speaking Jews. Women were allowed to attend the synagogues but were still separated from the men. There was no practice in their culture as equal rights. That is a modern practice of this culture but not biblical.

a reply to: adjensen

Most claims like this (along with the "Jesus was a Gnostic" crowd, also in the thread,) are the result of a complete ignorance of history. Jesus wasn't "turned into a God" by Constantine or anyone else -- the Council of Nicaea was called by Constantine to resolve the issue of the nature of Christ. Christians from the beginning worshipped Christ as God and believed him to be such. At Nicaea, the Bishops of the church, not Constantine (who publicly said that he didn't care what was decided,) rejected the heresy of Arianism, the claim that Christ was a creation of God, not divine in himself.

So, by your own admission, the Council of Nicaea declared Jesus as God, thereby the council "created" the Christian following of "Jesus is God" (Sol Invictus) and its mantra.



The Son is Risen!

a reply to: windword

So, by your own admission, the Council of Nicaea declared Jesus as God, thereby the council "created" the Christian following of "Jesus is God" (Sol Invictus) and its mantra.

The council of Nicaea voted overwhelming to accept the teaching that in the heavenly creation God took from Himself (not created) and brought forth His image as a personage but is not to be confused as to say that image is God. This personage had life within Himself just as his Father has life within Him. The celestial host called this personage God's only begotten named "The Word." God being total spirit and invisible even to the heavenly host had then presented Himself in the heavenly Host's understanding. They could then relate to the Spirit God in the same manner as we relate to the Spirit God by the personage of Jesus.

As "The Word" became flesh He then was given the name Yeshua or Jesus or many other names but all meaning the same personage. He then was called the only begotten Son of God because He was not created such as terrestrial men but was conceived (brought forth) by the same spirit God of which brought Him forth in the celestial realm. He was brought forth by the Spirit God into the flesh of a woman. His image (identification) remained the same as when He was "The Word" but His substance was changed from celestial to terrestrial. Terrestrial men are called sons of God but Jesus is called the Only Begotten Son of God.

The Christ Jesus was never God Himself. He was and is the Begotten of God both in the celestial realm and this terrestrial realm. The council of Nicaea had never declared Jesus as God and the Apostles and disciples never taught that Jesus was God and Jesus never taught He was God. When he returns He will be known as "The Word" of God. This is what the council of Nicaea determined in the first meeting of Christian bishops.

a reply to: Seede

that image is God

Jesus,, was in fact the Perfect image of God, made man.

And it was the last.

a reply to: Seede

Look, no matter how fancy you wrap it, the Council of Nicaea took an old pagan theme and on it superimposed a human being, who may or may not have really existed. This human being, who was a sacrificial beast, for all intents and purposes, represented the Jewish faith that was resurrected as a universal pagan religion that we call Christianity.

a reply to: Seede

You must remember that both Jesus and Paul obeyed the Hebrew understanding of their covenant with God through Moses. The new covenant had not as yet been revealed till Jesus died and had shed His blood for the new covenant.

No new "churches" were built when Jesus was alive. I have no time to argue with those that put Paul and Jesus together as creators of a new cult

originally posted by: Badgered1
Even if you can prove that a man of his description lived (and isn't a 'Robin Hood' type character who is made up from lots of separate stories), you'd still have nothing to show any of the supernatural claims.

The nativity is a mish-mash of previous mythology, and astronomy. The virgin birth is borrowed. The resurrection is borrowed. Unless there were several 'dress rehearsals,' the coincidences are just too compelling.

Of course, if you remove the supernatural you just have some cool dude who thought it would be cool if people were nice to each other. That part of the message really failed. It's only the supernatural which keeps people coming back, and there's no proof whatsoever for that.

The only pure conjecture that I see is in your version. The biblical version is based on eyewitnesses who testified at their own peril, the truthfulness of what Jesus spoke. These eyewitnesses were known as honest and good people who actually cared about truth, not like today where people just whine and make up versions that don't infringe upon their freedom to continue in wickedness.

a reply to: Seede

Ok the Nicae creed states

en.wikipedia.org...
"For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again"


en.wikipedia.org...
"In the presence of a crowd of Jewish mourners, Jesus comes to the tomb. Over the objections of Martha, Jesus has them roll the stone away from the entrance to the tomb and says a prayer. He then calls Lazarus to come out and Lazarus does so, still wrapped in his grave-cloths. Jesus then calls for someone to remove the grave-cloths, and let him go."

So they entombed the dead in Jesus times and later they buried the dead according to the creed.
If an easily testable practice as burial cannit be viewed under the mciroscope, do you think
virgin birth or logos incarnated into the christ can be relied upon other than a beleif of faith?

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Josephus wss the only historian who alluded to jesus the Nazarene. The rest of the people or witness' that you talk about come from where or what time in space? Heres a hint, time in space: written by back slapping cultis who created a new roman empire subsumed within a cult (Roman church)

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

whine and make up versions that don't infringe upon their freedom to continue in wickedness.

I dont whine that I was given reason and intellect. I dont play your game. Would your idea of wickedness have the possible outcome being cast to hell? Theres another good thread going on ATS at the moment about judgement.

Arianism
en.wikipedia.org...
"Arius taught that God the Father and the Son of God did not always exist together eternally.[5] Arians taught that the Logos was a divine being created by God the Father before the world. The Son of God is subordinate to God the Father.[6] In English-language works, it is sometimes said that Arians believe that Jesus is or was a "creature", in the sense of "created being". Arius and his followers appealed to Bible verses such as Jesus saying that the father is "greater than I" (John 14:28), and "The LORD/Yahweh created me at the beginning of his work" (Proverbs 8:22).[7"



"In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offence, he shall be submitted for capital punishment. ... "

— Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians[10]

Just as well some Christians on ATS are not Emperors, the majority who hold counter opinions, any writings or even post on here would be dead!~

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Out of the tens of thousands of people crucified by the romans in
absolute obscurity. Who's name is the one most revered even two
thousand years later and will continue to be thru out time? Just as
scripture predicted?

Jesus Christ

And it hasn't got anything to do with what you decide to believe.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

to get back to the original OP. I dont see many jews or christians today who have a problem with being charged or receiving interest on loans.

a reply to: randyvs

Who's name is the one most revered even two thousand years later

Randy out of those thousands are there any lists or names you could provide? See if there was a Jesus and he had such an effect on Rome I'm sure they would have it recorded somewhere. They were pretty good at recording events of significance.

And it hasn't got anything to do with what you decide to believe.

So you decided to beleive after perusing these historical records or after a vision on the road to Damascus a la Paul of Tarsus?

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

See if there was a Jesus and he had such an effect on Rome I'm sure they would have it recorded somewhere

I don't think you're getting all of it. Jesus Christ died in absolute obscurity to
Rome. Thus the lack of records. His death was insignificant to all of Rome. Yet
today, this is not the case. How many names did Rome make record of that
went to the cross? Even you admit there is no record of him. Yet he is most
revered and loved thru out the world today. And so has it been.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

See I have my own theories of Cosmogony. I dont thust them upon others unless they ask. Why is so hard to talk to Christians without "playing the man"

8 posts above by NoCorruptionAllowed

where people just whine and make up versions

And for all those intellectualy interested to whine is
noun: whine; plural noun: whines

1.
a long, high-pitched complaining cry.

Since when do our posts have sound attached? But whats one little lie in the big scheme of things.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

See if there was a Jesus and he had such an effect on Rome I'm sure they would have it recorded somewhere

I don't think you're getting all of it. Jesus Christ died in absolute obscurity to
Rome. Thus the lack of records. His death was insignificant to all of Rome. Yet
today, this is not the case. How many names did Rome make record of that
went to the cross? Even you admit there is no record of him. Yet he is most
revered and loved thru out the world today. And so has it been.

died in absolute obscurity to Rome.,,,no not so,,


Latin: Iēsus Nazarēnus, Rēx Iūdaeōrum)






represents the Latin inscription which in English reads as

"Jesus the Nazarene, King of the Jews" ...

so you see it was by Roman Decree,,
that Jesus was a King,,as well.
Even Rome could see that He was.

For those interested in how Josephus writings were "added to" by apologists I would recommend

www.jesusneverexisted.com...

a reply to: BobAthome

This was only a mockery put on the cross by the roman
guards. If he were truly thought of as King there would be a record.
Not even a nice try.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: BobAthome

This was only a mockery put on the cross by the roman
guards. If he were truly thought of as King there would be a record.
Not even a nice try.

Pontius Pilate
Born: Italy
Died: Italy

Pontius Pilate was the fifth prefect of the Roman province of Judaea,
from AD 26–36. He served under Emperor Tiberius,
and is best known for presiding over the trial of Jesus and ordering his crucifixion.

"Luke 3:1
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene,"


"And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews?
And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it.

Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man.


"And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, This Is The King Of The Jews."

better?