posted on May, 6 2016 @ 01:08 PM
a reply to: CapstonePendulum
Jesus the Messiah was crucified in favor of the "notorious" but mysterious Jesus Son of the Father.". Meaning the Messiah was never meant to be the
Son of God, just the Messiah who leads the Israelites to glory and for that matter the whole world. But fully human.
Could you explain why you chose that particular translation? Looking at twenty two translations i found only two that translate the name Jesus
Barabbas. That brings to question of which translation/s are true and which are not true. That means to me that somewhere is/are manuscript/s that
reads different than the majority Greek manuscripts. Would you care to name your source?
The Jews of that time (including the apostles) were born and raised in national rabbinic Judaic doctrine. The belief of a Messiah was that a human
man of the seed of David would one day appear, conquer the world and re establish the throne of David. This king would have special wisdom from the
God of Abraham, would live a long life and then die just as any human would die. Another Messiah would replace this dead Messiah and continue the
reign. This golden age would continue till the end of the world when all terrestrial life would be destroyed and all mankind resurrected back into
their flesh, judged and either destroyed or live forever as a bodiless soul in the bundle of life. There was believed to be a possibility of two
Jewish Messiah's. One was a messiah Ben Joseph or a Messiah Ben David appearing as the king.
Now that is far different from the doctrine of Jesus Ben Joseph, son of Mary, and far fetched as to Barabbas even remotely being considered to be a
candidate of any Messiah.
Am I to understand that you are to edit the NT and remove all information that teaches Jesus, son of Mary, was the Begotten Son of God and replace the
majority of thousands of Greek manuscripts with the notion that a thief and murderer named Barabbas was the son of the most high God? Am I missing
something or just that I don't understand?