Tuesday, 7 December 2010

Christians who Support Dr James White…

Could you folk help stimulate James White into answering a charge of dishonesty arising from his debate with Greg Stafford? Jordan (TheReligionFreeDeist) has graciously broken the charge down so the lay can follow. I genuinely believe James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries should invest some time into helping us clear this one up. Does White have a defence?

The Background

In his review of the White-Price debate, Jordan made a claim of White lying in the Greg Stafford debate. We did ask him to explain such and he has kindly gone to the length of explaining it via YouTube video (see below)

Obviously, courtesy (as well as the nature of the complaint – dishonesty) dictates White should respond in some capacity. We look forward to White’s explanation.In the process we would like White to apologize for this debacle, rather than sweeping it under the rug whilst misinforming his audience concerning the Quran:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/muslims-rebuke-dr-james-white.html

Video entitled: Dr. White DID lie in Stafford debate



Video description: Exposing a little debating tactic used by apologist. The apologist will attempt to append a "factual" statement (that is occasionally false) to the end of his cross-examination question, in an attempt to cause his opponent to fumble or second-guess himself, by shooting down the expected response before he can even begin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

White’ shoddy misinformation in the Robert Price debate

I have listened to most of this debate and White has blundered again concerning Ahadith literature. The man is clearly not studying in a concerted fashion; as a result he is misinforming people about Islamic matters. God willing this will be subject to a future blog post. Why ill-informed Christians readily present themselves as learned in Islamic matters is beyond me.

For those who are further interested - I have appended Jordan’s written explanation to the White-Stafford issue in the comment section

FEEDBACK: yahyasnow@hotmail.com

46 comments:

Yahya Snow said...

The reviewer (Jordan) sent me this email as to my questioning on the Greg Stafford debate:

Concerning the Greg Stafford debate, yes I have rock hard proof that White lied in his debate. Dr. White believes that John 12:41 is a reference to Isaiah 6:1 (Meaning that Jesus=YHWH) and Mr. Stafford believes that it is a reference to the suffering servant in Isaiah 53. In White's cross examination of Stafford, concerning John 12:41 Dr. White asked "Could you explain why it is that in the Septuagint Isaiah 6:1 uses all the key terms found in Isaiah 12:41 [He meant John 12:41] including ειδον and δοξα...all terms NOT found in Isaiah 53". Stafford does call him out by immediately saying "Because it is NOT TRUE that those terms are NOT found in Isaiah 53"...but then Stafford goes on about the use of the verbal form of δοξα being used (δοξαζω) in Isaiah 53:13 in the Septuagint. Stafford is both right and wrong. There is no verse 13 of Isaiah 53 in the Septuagint, and I am not exactly sure what passage he is referring to in regards to the "glorification of the messiah". But Stafford was correct when he said that both terms ARE found in Isaiah 53. Both ειδον and δοξα are found in verse 2. I actually agree with Stafford on the understanding of John 12:41 referring to Isaiah 53. What John is saying is that the people (Israel) did NOT behold the Messiah's glory, but Isaiah beheld his glory in a prophetic advance. Obviously, the lie that White told is when he said that these two terms were NOT found in Isaiah 53, when in fact they are. This is a common debate tactic with many apologist. The apologist will slip in an untrue statement appended to his cross-examination question, in an attempt to cause the opponent to second guess himself and think "I thought those terms were in there, but he probably would not have said that if they were"......"Do I take a chance and call him a liar? or do I grant him the benefit of the doubt and take another route, even though he may be lying". Nine times out of ten the tactic works; and Stafford almost pulled through, but unfortunately, in this case Stafford was unable to point directly to the location of the terms. This was not a White blunder. This was not a "white lie". This was a LIE by White. You cannot even BEGIN to read Isaiah 53 without reading BOTH of those terms! He has read the passage and he KNOWS they are in there

minoria said...

Hello Yahya:

Since the post where you made the comment I am referring to is about to disappear and since this post has a similar theme I post here.

First,I understand by your request to send the latest post to James White to be the youtube video link that's 7 minutes,the second one by his critic.No problem,I will,to the website of Alpha ministries.

If I understand you correctly you said that Jesus would not be put into a new tomb because of his social status(that he was poor).He would at least be put in a tomb.The phrase "heart of the earth" is just a METAPHOR(Matthew 12:39-40).It meant he was really to be dead without a doubt.That he would die(not become unconscious and be mistaken for dead on the cross)and later be put in a tomb(following Jewish custom).

RELIABILITY OF JOHN

I say it is just as reliable.There are about 3 or 4 speeches where Jesus talks in a mystical way,similar to the Essenes.That shows the style was NOT a Hellenistic addition invented later but such language EXISTED in PALESTINE in the TIME of Jesus.That shows Jesus could very well have talked like that.

Q AGAIN

It's 230 verses common to Matthew and Luke,but absent from Mark.We have MATT 11:25-27/LUKE 10:21-22 where the same mystical language is used.Q is from 50 AD,John from 90 AD.So we have an INDEPENDENT and EARLIER passage that confirms Jesus did talk like that on occasion.

Compare the Q passage with JOHN 5:19-22/14:23-24.They are similar.

PERCENTAGE OF JESUS' MYSTICAL LANGUAGE IN JOHN

When you read his mystical speeches and his other conversations you see HALF the time Jesus IN JOHN spoke similar to Jesus of the SYNOPTICS.The mystical language is for certain occasions,speeches.Many or most say those mystical speeches are PARAPHRASES(the real Jesus did not say it but the author put them in Jesus' mouth,but was faithful to his ideas).Paraphrasing was an accepted practice(with a 90% ILLITERACY RATE)as long as the person was faithful to the teaching.However,for me:
1.The Q passage
2.And the Essene language similarity
3.Plus Essene customs among early Christians
are strong factors that Jesus did on occasion speak like that.

minoria said...

Hello Yahya:

Since the post where you made the comment I am referring to is about to disappear and since this post has a similar theme I post here.

First,I understand by your request to send the latest post to James White to be the youtube video link that's 7 minutes,the second one by his critic.No problem,I will,to the website of Alpha ministries.

If I understand you correctly you said that Jesus would not be put into a new tomb because of his social status(that he was poor).He would at least be put in a tomb.The phrase "heart of the earth" is just a METAPHOR(Matthew 12:39-40).It meant he was really to be dead without a doubt.That he would die(not become unconscious and be mistaken for dead on the cross)and later be put in a tomb(following Jewish custom).

RELIABILITY OF JOHN

I say it is just as reliable.There are about 3 or 4 speeches where Jesus talks in a mystical way,similar to the Essenes.That shows the style was NOT a Hellenistic addition invented later but such language EXISTED in PALESTINE in the TIME of Jesus.That shows Jesus could very well have talked like that.

Q AGAIN

It's 230 verses common to Matthew and Luke,but absent from Mark.We have MATT 11:25-27/LUKE 10:21-22 where the same mystical language is used.Q is from 50 AD,John from 90 AD.So we have an INDEPENDENT and EARLIER passage that confirms Jesus did talk like that on occasion.

Compare the Q passage with JOHN 5:19-22/14:23-24.They are similar.

PERCENTAGE OF JESUS' MYSTICAL LANGUAGE IN JOHN

When you read his mystical speeches and his other conversations you see HALF the time Jesus IN JOHN spoke similar to Jesus of the SYNOPTICS.The mystical language is for certain occasions,speeches.Many or most say those mystical speeches are PARAPHRASES(the real Jesus did not say it but the author put them in Jesus' mouth,but was faithful to his ideas).Paraphrasing was an accepted practice(with a 90% ILLITERACY RATE)as long as the person was faithful to the teaching.However,for me:
1.The Q passage
2.And the Essene language similarity
3.Plus Essene customs among early Christians
are strong factors that Jesus did on occasion speak like that.

minoria said...

Hello:

You had mentioned you were going to comment on DEUT 22:28-29.Here is my observation:

DEUTERONOMY 22:28-29

"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."

There are arguments that the Hebrew is talking about consensual sex but since you won't accept it I will argue differently.

RAPE IS CONDEMNED IN MOSAIC LAW

DEUT 22:25-27:

"But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor, 27 for the man found the young woman out in the country, and though the betrothed woman screamed, there was no one to rescue her."

SPIRIT OF THE LAW AND LETTER OF THE LAW

The Jews were not stupid.They noticed:

1.One law modified another.
2.Some laws were very specific.
3.There were no laws for other specific situations.

So they applied the principle of applying the Spirit of the Law as well as the Letter of the Law.They also obtained GENERAL PRINCIPLES from a SPECIFIC situation in a Mosaic law.

EXAMPLE

There are laws that say a debtor has to work for free for years.Another law,the JUBILEE one says all slaves are to be free every 50 years.Problem:"what if only 2 years have passed and then there is the JUBILEE?Will he be free or not?Which law modified which one?"
They noticed passages like those that said that after 7 years the master had to give ALOT of GIFTS to the ex-debtors.And another one that said "there will be NO POOR among you."They got from that the idea that if one law modified another it had to be in favor of a merciful spirit...so the Jubilee took precedence over the 7 years.

The spirit of the law/general principle got from the DEATH FOR THE RAPIST in DEUT 22:25-27 is that rape is evil and deserves death.For a Jew God is not a God of contradiction.Yes he has to marry her,but when he dies she would get his property.But God by really consenting to rape would be in contradiction and DEUT 22:25-27 does say to kill a rapist,so that would be what would happen to man who raped a girl who was not betrothed to anybody as in DEUT 22:28-29.If she had been betrothed then DEUT 22:25-27 would have applied.

minoria said...

Hello:

You had mentioned you were going to comment on DEUT 22:28-29.Here is my observation:

DEUTERONOMY 22:28-29

"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."

There are arguments that the Hebrew is talking about consensual sex but since you won't accept it I will argue differently.

RAPE IS CONDEMNED IN MOSAIC LAW

DEUT 22:25-27:

"But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor, 27 for the man found the young woman out in the country, and though the betrothed woman screamed, there was no one to rescue her."

SPIRIT OF THE LAW AND LETTER OF THE LAW

The Jews were not stupid.They noticed:

1.One law modified another.
2.Some laws were very specific.
3.There were no laws for other specific situations.

So they applied the principle of applying the Spirit of the Law as well as the Letter of the Law.They also obtained GENERAL PRINCIPLES from a SPECIFIC situation in a Mosaic law.

EXAMPLE

There are laws that say a debtor has to work for free for years.Another law,the JUBILEE one says all slaves are to be free every 50 years.Problem:"what if only 2 years have passed and then there is the JUBILEE?Will he be free or not?Which law modified which one?"
They noticed passages like those that said that after 7 years the master had to give ALOT of GIFTS to the ex-debtors.And another one that said "there will be NO POOR among you."They got from that the idea that if one law modified another it had to be in favor of a merciful spirit...so the Jubilee took precedence over the 7 years.

The spirit of the law/general principle got from the DEATH FOR THE RAPIST in DEUT 22:25-27 is that rape is evil and deserves death.For a Jew God is not a God of contradiction.Yes he has to marry her,but when he dies she would get his property.But God by really consenting to rape would be in contradiction and DEUT 22:25-27 does say to kill a rapist,so that would be what would happen to man who raped a girl who was not betrothed to anybody as in DEUT 22:28-29.If she had been betrothed then DEUT 22:25-27 would have applied.

Ali said...

hi minoria, i suggest you contact david wood and ask him why he censors comments that refute him (hint hint). yahya removes comments that are offensive and uprofessional.
also minoria, what about deut 22:24? a woman getting stoned for not screaming when she was gtting raped?
and please, no one believes that deut 22:28 speaks of consensual sex. obviously missionary deception is to come up with some sort of excuse to try and cover up the real meaning of the verse(s).

Anonymous said...

also minoria, what about deut 22:24? a woman getting stoned for not screaming when she was gtting raped?

This is talking about adultery dummy. The woman commits adultery. And there is a difference between ACTIVE and PASSIVE.

and please, no one believes that deut 22:28 speaks of consensual sex.

By "no one" do you mean muslims only because the Jews certainly do!:

28-29: ...The law...follows the literary model of Exod. 22.16-17, which specifies sexual intercourse with, but not forced rape of, a "virgin who is not engaged."

28: Seizes her: The Hebrew word differs from that in v. 25, where force is clearly intended; here it may mean simply "hold" or "handle" (Jer. 2.8). And lies with her, as in Exod. 22.15. The fact of intercourse normally marks legal consummation of a marrige; here it places the places the woman in a legally ambiguous position, unavaliable to others (v. 14).

- Commentary for Deut 22.28 from The Jewish Study Bible by the Jewish Publication Society.

So are the Rebbe and HaRav deceptive christian missionaries or are you just a retard?

Force is mentioned in verse 25 of Deut. 22. A different word is used in verse 28 where no force is mentioned because it is consensual.

1moremuslim said...

Dr White had never give apologies for mistakes , and he will never do it. Because he is dishonest. What he is interested at is to score points in a live debate, so the donations will go up. That is what AOmin corporation all about.

1moremuslim said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
1moremuslim said...

To Minoria;

"0For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

Jesus is making a parallel between himself And Jonah. What you are saying, is that Jesus failed twice.
Failure #1: Jesus was Dead but Jonah was not.
Failure #2: Jonah stayed alive for THREE Nights, Jesus didn't last for more than 2 nights.
What was the Parallel about? I don't know!
minoria, when will you decide to get a brain?
And you dare tell us that we don't respect Jesus?

minoria said...

Hello:

First I already a link to the youtube video to James White.

Hello Ali:
Annymous gave you an example of DEUT 22:28-29 as being interpreted as referring to consensual sex.As for David Wood censoring comments against him I am not too sure since 2 or 3 of my comments were not posted,and they certainly had nothing against him,there could be a technical problem.

ABOUT JOHN'S RELIABILILTY

The main reason,I think,skeptical scholars reject its historicity is because it has Jesus say he is GOD.When you read them they say Jesus thought of himself as a social revolutionary,or Jewish philosopher or Jewish mystic-holy man,etc,but never as God,NOT the HISTORICAL Jesus.
So JOHN saysit was actually written by a disciple,an eyewitness to:
1.The Last Supper
2.The crucifixion(it even says he say when the soldier pierced Jesus in the chest to make sure he was dead)
3.He ran with Peter and saw the empty tomb
4.He saw the post-resurrection Jesus in Galilee.

The "beloved disciple"also says Jesus was God.You can't get better than that.But if Jesus never said he was God then the whole gospel is a farce.But what if he did?Then he was crazy or a charlatan,but not God.They don't believe(based on the evidence) he was crazy or a fraud so they reject he said he was God.

THE TRILEMMA

C.S.LEWIS gave the trilemma of "Lord,Liar or Lunatic" in "Mere Christianity".Skeptical scholars add "Legend".Lewis rejected that idea,that Jesus saying he was God was a legend.

Regarding what was said by another about the "3 days and 3 nights" phrase it is taken to be an expression based on other passages,in the OT.The Son of Man saying is a MIDRASHIC saying where not every detail is supposed to be exact,but the main idea is exact.
Another argument is that Jesus had the last supper on a Tuesday,according to the Essene calender,which would make it literally 3 days and 3 nights.But more on this later.

Regarding the positions of Stafford and White about if John 12 meant Isaiah 53 or Isaiah 6 I think it can be applied to both since in the MIDRASH method such PARALLELISMS were used.Now the evidence,it seems,is that James White was wrong about the words that appear or dont appear in Isaiah 53,etc,but I don't see why John 12 can't also refer to Isaiah 6:1-8.

minoria said...

Hello:

First I already a link to the youtube video to James White.

Hello Ali:
Annymous gave you an example of DEUT 22:28-29 as being interpreted as referring to consensual sex.As for David Wood censoring comments against him I am not too sure since 2 or 3 of my comments were not posted,and they certainly had nothing against him,there could be a technical problem.

ABOUT JOHN'S RELIABILILTY

The main reason,I think,skeptical scholars reject its historicity is because it has Jesus say he is GOD.When you read them they say Jesus thought of himself as a social revolutionary,or Jewish philosopher or Jewish mystic-holy man,etc,but never as God,NOT the HISTORICAL Jesus.
So JOHN saysit was actually written by a disciple,an eyewitness to:
1.The Last Supper
2.The crucifixion(it even says he say when the soldier pierced Jesus in the chest to make sure he was dead)
3.He ran with Peter and saw the empty tomb
4.He saw the post-resurrection Jesus in Galilee.

The "beloved disciple"also says Jesus was God.You can't get better than that.But if Jesus never said he was God then the whole gospel is a farce.But what if he did?Then he was crazy or a charlatan,but not God.They don't believe(based on the evidence) he was crazy or a fraud so they reject he said he was God.

THE TRILEMMA

C.S.LEWIS gave the trilemma of "Lord,Liar or Lunatic" in "Mere Christianity".Skeptical scholars add "Legend".Lewis rejected that idea,that Jesus saying he was God was a legend.

Regarding what was said by another about the "3 days and 3 nights" phrase it is taken to be an expression based on other passages,in the OT.The Son of Man saying is a MIDRASHIC saying where not every detail is supposed to be exact,but the main idea is exact.
Another argument is that Jesus had the last supper on a Tuesday,according to the Essene calender,which would make it literally 3 days and 3 nights.But more on this later.

Regarding the positions of Stafford and White about if John 12 meant Isaiah 53 or Isaiah 6 I think it can be applied to both since in the MIDRASH method such PARALLELISMS were used.Now the evidence,it seems,is that James White was wrong about the words that appear or dont appear in Isaiah 53,etc,but I don't see why John 12 can't also refer to Isaiah 6:1-8.

Yahya Snow said...

@Minoria

Firstly, the "trilemma".

It is a misdirection. Allow me to explain

Torpov in his response to CS Lewis considers his to be an irrtating argument which he likens to a magician's trick!

I would also like to sate CS Lewis, presents two possibilities and states "there is no middle ground" whilst giving two options; "lunatic" or "son of god".

Now this is folly as it is designed to move an individual to the "son of god" idea as "who will maintain that Jesus was a lunatic"?

The problem with such a sleight of hand style of argumentation is that it removes other options (one of which is much MOR FEASIBLE).

Jewish researchers (from what I recall Vermes is of this opinion) would consider Jesus to be a RABBI. A charismatic one at that. Rabbi Boteach would agree (as far ass I recall). So WHY DID YOU NOT INCLUDE SUCH AN OPTION IN YOUR ARGUMENT? Furthermore, why did CS Lewis in his 1952 work give us the "lunatic-or son of god" misdirection? The answer lies in the question...a misdirection. A TRICK to get us in line iwth his thought pattern.

Furtermore, and more importantly, the other option you and Lewis could have supplied us with is that of Jesus being a PROPHET. Islam teaches him to be a Prophet and Jewish apologists would not be overly concerned with Jesus bein a Propeht either. AND Christians believe him to be a
Prophet (though some add the title of son of god too).

Think about it minoria...don't be fooled by such a popular misdirection. Lewis misdirected us. His is an annoying and misleading argument.

Yahya Snow said...

@minoria

Thanks for passing the vid on to brother James.

Can I ask you what you menat by "mystical? You mentioned it at least twice...

You also stated:

"I say it is just as reliable.There are about 3 or 4 speeches where Jesus talks in a mystical way,similar to the Essenes.That shows the style was NOT a Hellenistic addition invented later but such language EXISTED in PALESTINE in the TIME of Jesus.That shows Jesus could very well have talked like that"

You belive the gospel of John to be just as reliable as Mark ot the shared statements of Luke and Mat?

This in the face of proven evolution and embelishment of stories to fit in line with beliefs held by the authors?

This "evolution" is attested by Ehrman. We are not simply making this up - it is a tangible evolution that one can realise through CAREFUL independent reading even!

I want to get to the primary reason for your comment - Deut 22. But before doing so I will remind you there is NO Resurrection account in Mark. We already know the primacy of Mark. Interesting. Ik know you know 9-20 would be considered apocryphal (at the least) if not all together forgeries by fundamnetalist Christians. An unknown man in a white robe (in an empty tomb) claiming he has risen is hardly evidence for an actual resurrection....right?

The possibility that Jesus was still alive at this time remains.

I also think you mentioned the spear thrust? Which Gosepl is that in? Exactly!!! Think about it...

Going back to Deut 22. Excellent. Finally somebody brought up the traditional explantion. An explanation I accept!. Minoria, contrary to what you believe I am NOT criticising the law. I merely used it to establish a point of consisteny.

I ACCEPT this explanation. However, the translation needs further research. I dis plan to ask a scholar about the actual translation. If it refers to "seduced" then there is a REAL issue ( actually more than one) regarding the other laws and the IMPLICATIONS of such a translation. That is what I planned to pen in my response. I'm pretty sure you can imagine what I'm speaking about.

Peace

1moremuslim said...

Minoria;
What is the parallel between Jesus and Jonah?

minoria said...

HELLO YAHYA:

You have raised many points.One of them is LEWIS didn't allow other possibilities like just a holy man,rabbi.It also falls into the LUNATIC category:

1.One can be holy yet crazy.
2.But holy and a liar,impossible.
3.Or crazy and a liar.

Vermes,Boteach(both Jewish)don't think he was crazy or a liar but a saint and that Jesus saying he was God is a legend,invention.But is it?

HELLO 1MOREMUSLIM:

There is a good argument that Jesus,having affinities with the ESSENES,had the last supper on a TUESDAY,in 30 AD.Scholars are divided between the 30 AD and 33 AD.

First link(very interesting):

http://star.wind.mystarband.net/bib/essene_passover_dates.html

Second link:

http://www.bibarch.com/concepts/Calendrics/essene_calendar.htm

"3 DAYS AND 3 NIGHTS"

Esther has a similar expression:

ESTHER 4:16:(Young's Literal Translation)

"Go, gather all the Jews who are found in Shushan, and fast for me, and do not eat nor drink THREED DAYS, by NIGHT and by DAY; also I and my young women do fast likewise, and so I go in unto the king, that [is] not according to law, and when I have perished -- I have perished."


Yet Esther did not fast for the 3rd night:


ESTHER 5:1:

"On the THIRD DAY Esther put on her royal robes and stood in the inner court of the palace, in front of the king’s hall. The king was sitting on his royal throne in the hall, facing the entrance."


MIDRASH

It's a Jewish technique,invented long before the NT,where they look for parallelisms,repetitions to see if the find a "message".Paul referred to this in:

1 COR 15: 3-4:

"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES."

There are no propheties that say "the Messiah will die and resurrect on the THIRD DAY".He meant midrash,here is where JONAH appears;

Midrash technique because of :

1.ABRAHAM went to kill Isaac and it took him 3 DAYS to get to the sacrifice place.

2.JOSEPH was in prison in Egypt.He interpreted a man's dream,in 3 DAYS you will die.

3.JONAH was in a big fish for 3 DAYS,maybe he was dead or maybe not.He says he was in SHEOL(land of the dead).Maybe he was being expressive or maybe he really died.

In JONAH 2:1-2;

"From inside the fish Jonah prayed to the LORD his God. 2 He said:
“In my distress I called to the LORD,
and he answered me.
From deep in the REALM OF THE DEAD(Sheol) I called for help,
and you listened to my cry."

SO?

All 3 stories have REPETITIONS:the themes of life,death,3 days.So that is what Paul meant,that was the message-midrash.In the Sign of Jonah saying you have the same technique,there is the parallelism.

MORE ON JEWISH TRADITION

There were different groups in Jesus' time:the Saducees,Pharisees,Essenes,Zealots.The first 3 were into theology and they had DIFFERENT interpretations of MOSAIC LAW so I am not inventing things by saying "X Mosaic law can and was interpreted differently."

EXAMPLE

The Saducees said "Eye for Eye"was LITERAL,the Pharisees said it was "the PRICE of an eye for an eye."The ESSENES,based on their study of Mosaic law,rejected slavery and it appears even polygamy.

GO TO THE TALMUD

The supreme example is that book,20 volumes,I believe about 1.5 million words.You have commentaries on Mosaic law,plus commentaries on the commentaries,plus commentaries on the commentaries of the commentaries.There you have debates by different teachers giving OPPOSING VIEWS.

More later on on why I think the first disciples believed Jesus was God,it is a bit related to the case of RABBI SCHNEERSON and the LUBAVITCHERS, who are ultra-Orthodox Jews.

minoria said...

HELLO YAHYA:

You have raised many points.One of them is LEWIS didn't allow other possibilities like just a holy man,rabbi.It also falls into the LUNATIC category:

1.One can be holy yet crazy.
2.But holy and a liar,impossible.
3.Or crazy and a liar.

Vermes,Boteach(both Jewish)don't think he was crazy or a liar but a saint and that Jesus saying he was God is a legend,invention.But is it?

HELLO 1MOREMUSLIM:

There is a good argument that Jesus,having affinities with the ESSENES,had the last supper on a TUESDAY,in 30 AD.Scholars are divided between the 30 AD and 33 AD.

First link(very interesting):

http://star.wind.mystarband.net/bib/essene_passover_dates.html

Second link:

http://www.bibarch.com/concepts/Calendrics/essene_calendar.htm

"3 DAYS AND 3 NIGHTS"

Esther has a similar expression:

ESTHER 4:16:(Young's Literal Translation)

"Go, gather all the Jews who are found in Shushan, and fast for me, and do not eat nor drink THREED DAYS, by NIGHT and by DAY; also I and my young women do fast likewise, and so I go in unto the king, that [is] not according to law, and when I have perished -- I have perished."


Yet Esther did not fast for the 3rd night:


ESTHER 5:1:

"On the THIRD DAY Esther put on her royal robes and stood in the inner court of the palace, in front of the king’s hall. The king was sitting on his royal throne in the hall, facing the entrance."


MIDRASH

It's a Jewish technique,invented long before the NT,where they look for parallelisms,repetitions to see if the find a "message".Paul referred to this in:

1 COR 15: 3-4:

"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES."

There are no propheties that say "the Messiah will die and resurrect on the THIRD DAY".He meant midrash,here is where JONAH appears;

Midrash technique because of :

1.ABRAHAM went to kill Isaac and it took him 3 DAYS to get to the sacrifice place.

2.JOSEPH was in prison in Egypt.He interpreted a man's dream,in 3 DAYS you will die.

3.JONAH was in a big fish for 3 DAYS,maybe he was dead or maybe not.He says he was in SHEOL(land of the dead).Maybe he was being expressive or maybe he really died.

In JONAH 2:1-2;

"From inside the fish Jonah prayed to the LORD his God. 2 He said:
“In my distress I called to the LORD,
and he answered me.
From deep in the REALM OF THE DEAD(Sheol) I called for help,
and you listened to my cry."

SO?

All 3 stories have REPETITIONS:the themes of life,death,3 days.So that is what Paul meant,that was the message-midrash.In the Sign of Jonah saying you have the same technique,there is the parallelism.

MORE ON JEWISH TRADITION

There were different groups in Jesus' time:the Saducees,Pharisees,Essenes,Zealots.The first 3 were into theology and they had DIFFERENT interpretations of MOSAIC LAW so I am not inventing things by saying "X Mosaic law can and was interpreted differently."

EXAMPLE

The Saducees said "Eye for Eye"was LITERAL,the Pharisees said it was "the PRICE of an eye for an eye."The ESSENES,based on their study of Mosaic law,rejected slavery and it appears even polygamy.

GO TO THE TALMUD

The supreme example is that book,20 volumes,I believe about 1.5 million words.You have commentaries on Mosaic law,plus commentaries on the commentaries,plus commentaries on the commentaries of the commentaries.There you have debates by different teachers giving OPPOSING VIEWS.

More later on on why I think the first disciples believed Jesus was God,it is a bit related to the case of RABBI SCHNEERSON and the LUBAVITCHERS, who are ultra-Orthodox Jews.

minoria said...

Hello 1moremuslim:

First I dont know why the post repeats itself twice,Ihopeitdoesnt again.

I forgot to add the example of ESTHER.I had given 3 examples of stories with the themes of LIFE,DEATH and 3 DAYS:
1.Abraham and Isaac
2.Joseph and a dream interpreted
3.Jonah
4.Now ESTHER:Haman convinced the king of Persia to kill all the Jews,Esther,his wife told her people to pray for THREE DAYS,on the 3rd day she convinced the king to stop.

WHY 3 DAYS?

Why not 2 days,or 4 or 5 days?If one is into MIDRASH one can say there is a message here(plus that the resurrection of Jesus was on the 3RD DAY),it seems the reason for the NUMBER THREE is because of the TRINITY.

INDIRECT EVIDENCE THE JEWISH FOLLOWERS OF JESUS IN JUDEA BELIEVE JESUS WAS GOD:

First of all in 70 AD ALL the documents in Jerusalem were utterly destroyed,whatever information about Jesus and James and the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem there was disappeared forever.But we have certain evidence:

1.PAUL in his letters says 3X that he was a persecutor of the Christians.Why?A JEW persecuting other JEWS.It was in 33 AD.
2.In 1 THESSA 2:14 he says the church in JUDEA was being persecuted by the JEWS.Practically all of the Church of Judea(capital:Jerusalem) were JEWS.It was in the 50's AD.Jews persecuting other Jews.Why?
3.JOSEPHUS in his "Jewish Antiquities,20:9:1)says "JAMES,brother of JESUS,the one called the MESSIAH" was killed by the JEWISH HIGH PRIEST for "breaking the LAW"(Mosaic law).No specifics.Why would the Jewish High Priest hate another Jew so much?It was 62 AD.

There were different Jewish groups in Palestine:Sadducees,Pharisees,Essenes.They disagreed but they didn't persecute each other.

WHY?
Did Paul,many Jews in the 50's and the High Priest in 62 AD persecute other Jews?
Was it because they believed in the RESURRECTION of Jesus?No,it was an accepted Jewish belief.

EXAMPLE

PICHAS LAPIDE was a Jewish rabbi,Orthodox Jew,theologian and intellectual.In 1978 he wrote "The Resurrection of Jesus:a Jewish Perspective".He ACCEPTED the resurrection.But he rejected that Jesus was the Messiah or that he said he was God.

Was it because they believed Jesus was the MESSIAH?No,that was not contrary to Jewish belief.There have been several Messiah claimants in Jewish history,like BAR KOKHBA(135 AD).

The only logical reason for such persecution(hatred) was because they believed Jesus was GOD.

RABBI SCHNEERSON(leader of the Lubavitchers) AND THE LUBAVITCHERS

They are ultra-Orthodox.During the life of Rabbi Schneerson his followers thoughthe was the MESSIAH(but he never said it).After his death some said he was GOD.
Christian scholar GREG BOYD wrote "The Jesus Legend:A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition"(2007).It is criticized by ROBERT PRICE in the collection of essays called "The Christian Delusion"(2010).On page 282 he says:
"What about the worship of Menachem Mendel Schneerson,the Lubavitcher Rebbe,believed by most of his followers during his lifetime to be the Messiah,though he never said so?He died and immediately his fans predicted his return in glory and began hailing him as God incarnate!Now where did they get such a notion.which non-Lubavitcher Jews,needless to say,do not exactly welcome?
If it sprang spontaneously from Messianic adoration,and overnight after the Rebbe's death,there would seem to be no miracle needed to explain how Jewish disciples soon ascribed incarnate divinity to Jesus,right?Oh,no!The cases are not similar at all Boyd and Eddy tell us (p. 150-151).
The Lubavitchers must have borrowed it from Christianity!Yeah,that's really likely.Hasidic Jews borrowing myths from the religion they hated most!If Jesus' disciples wouldn't have stooped to borrowing theology from pagans,there is even less likekihood Hasidic Jews would have cribbed from Christinaity."

A bit more on this later on.

minoria said...

Hello 1moremuslim:

First I dont know why the post repeats itself twice,Ihopeitdoesnt again.

I forgot to add the example of ESTHER.I had given 3 examples of stories with the themes of LIFE,DEATH and 3 DAYS:
1.Abraham and Isaac
2.Joseph and a dream interpreted
3.Jonah
4.Now ESTHER:Haman convinced the king of Persia to kill all the Jews,Esther,his wife told her people to pray for THREE DAYS,on the 3rd day she convinced the king to stop.

WHY 3 DAYS?

Why not 2 days,or 4 or 5 days?If one is into MIDRASH one can say there is a message here(plus that the resurrection of Jesus was on the 3RD DAY),it seems the reason for the NUMBER THREE is because of the TRINITY.

INDIRECT EVIDENCE THE JEWISH FOLLOWERS OF JESUS IN JUDEA BELIEVE JESUS WAS GOD:

First of all in 70 AD ALL the documents in Jerusalem were utterly destroyed,whatever information about Jesus and James and the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem there was disappeared forever.But we have certain evidence:

1.PAUL in his letters says 3X that he was a persecutor of the Christians.Why?A JEW persecuting other JEWS.It was in 33 AD.
2.In 1 THESSA 2:14 he says the church in JUDEA was being persecuted by the JEWS.Practically all of the Church of Judea(capital:Jerusalem) were JEWS.It was in the 50's AD.Jews persecuting other Jews.Why?
3.JOSEPHUS in his "Jewish Antiquities,20:9:1)says "JAMES,brother of JESUS,the one called the MESSIAH" was killed by the JEWISH HIGH PRIEST for "breaking the LAW"(Mosaic law).No specifics.Why would the Jewish High Priest hate another Jew so much?It was 62 AD.

There were different Jewish groups in Palestine:Sadducees,Pharisees,Essenes.They disagreed but they didn't persecute each other.

WHY?
Did Paul,many Jews in the 50's and the High Priest in 62 AD persecute other Jews?
Was it because they believed in the RESURRECTION of Jesus?No,it was an accepted Jewish belief.

EXAMPLE

PICHAS LAPIDE was a Jewish rabbi,Orthodox Jew,theologian and intellectual.In 1978 he wrote "The Resurrection of Jesus:a Jewish Perspective".He ACCEPTED the resurrection.But he rejected that Jesus was the Messiah or that he said he was God.

Was it because they believed Jesus was the MESSIAH?No,that was not contrary to Jewish belief.There have been several Messiah claimants in Jewish history,like BAR KOKHBA(135 AD).

The only logical reason for such persecution(hatred) was because they believed Jesus was GOD.

RABBI SCHNEERSON(leader of the Lubavitchers) AND THE LUBAVITCHERS

They are ultra-Orthodox.During the life of Rabbi Schneerson his followers thoughthe was the MESSIAH(but he never said it).After his death some said he was GOD.
Christian scholar GREG BOYD wrote "The Jesus Legend:A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition"(2007).It is criticized by ROBERT PRICE in the collection of essays called "The Christian Delusion"(2010).On page 282 he says:
"What about the worship of Menachem Mendel Schneerson,the Lubavitcher Rebbe,believed by most of his followers during his lifetime to be the Messiah,though he never said so?He died and immediately his fans predicted his return in glory and began hailing him as God incarnate!Now where did they get such a notion.which non-Lubavitcher Jews,needless to say,do not exactly welcome?
If it sprang spontaneously from Messianic adoration,and overnight after the Rebbe's death,there would seem to be no miracle needed to explain how Jewish disciples soon ascribed incarnate divinity to Jesus,right?Oh,no!The cases are not similar at all Boyd and Eddy tell us (p. 150-151).
The Lubavitchers must have borrowed it from Christianity!Yeah,that's really likely.Hasidic Jews borrowing myths from the religion they hated most!If Jesus' disciples wouldn't have stooped to borrowing theology from pagans,there is even less likekihood Hasidic Jews would have cribbed from Christinaity."

A bit more on this later on.

Anonymous said...

Hello there,

Thanks for sharing this link - but unfortunately it seems to be down? Does anybody here at thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com have a mirror or another source?


Thanks,
Jules

Dark Lord said...

Minoria
Paleography is not the only way to determine on which era the text was composed as you discussed the authenticity of John,no serious scholar would make such a bold claim,you cannot base the entire argument on a single method,only a schoolboy would do it

maratsafin said...

minoria you complete liar, boteach and vermes do not think of jesus as a saint. boteach thinks he was a learned rabbi and geza vermes thinks he was a apocalyptic messiah. and as for the midrash those kind of explanation were brought upbecause a lot of prophecies in the bible are not fulfilled. thats why you lot bring stuff like typology and other rubbish. that stuff you brought about 3 days somehow showing the way to the trinity is what lot do with prophecies in the old testament,just take passage out of now where and twist it so much it seems like a prophetic fulfillment.also about the supposed ressurection, jesus wasnt even in his grave for three days and three nights more like 2 and a bit if that (depends which gospel you read). then your desperation gets even worse by citing a story about jews thinking a guy was the messiah and worshipping him!!! like the jews never got anything wrong!!! so what if a minority of them think that a messiah might be divine? its not the majority opinion is it? some of them think in the messianic age all gentiles will be under thier dominion and yes it in thier talmud as well,which as you rightly state is a commentary on the ot,does it make thier interpretation right ? certainly not. it is this type of desperate interpretation of the bible that makes mormons belive in many Gods and they cite passages from the ot as well and early church fathers!!! does it make them right?? seriously minoria i think your faith might be shaky when you go to these lengths to try and defend prophecy/statemensts/beliefs. you know most of what we of the essenes come from the dead sea scrolls written about the time of jesus and what makes it bad for christians is in all those scrolls there is nothing about jesus but they do reinforce the theory that 1st century jews were apocalyptic and thought the messianic age was on the verge of fullfilment.back to the essenes the reason why some christians try to claim jesus may have followed thier way is because john completely disagree's with the timing of the his passion narrative with the synoptics,this what the jesuit carsten thiede has tried to do, his other fraudulent claim and been debunked as well is that one of the fragments in qumran scrolls is part of mark.

1moremuslim said...

Minoria:
Keep following what the Jews worship, one day you will find yourself worshiping a calf made of silver, instead of Gold.

minoria said...

HELLO DARK LORD:

The way I understood your comment was that you think I am saying that JOHN was written earlier than 90 AD based on its resemblance with the Essene documents.That wouldn't be it, all it shows is that the way Jesus in his long speeches there talks was a language style that DID EXIST in his time in PALESTINE,it was NOT borrowed from Hellenistic culture.

HELLO MARATSAFIN:

Well,I know BOTEACH in his debate with MICHAEL BROWN calls Jesus a martyr(go to youtube),meaning to the Jewish faith,so at least he doesn't consider him a fraud,nor has GEZA VERMES,Jewish,ever written that Jesus was a charlatan,but he called him a HASID(pious man).As I said before MIDRASH was invented a long time before Jesus and you find alot of Midrash comments in the Talmud.All I said was that the insistance on the NUMBER 3 could be a reference to the Trinity.

You said about which day was the Last Supper.According to JOHN it was BEFORE the PASSOVER,the Synoptics say it was on the PASSOVER.The discovery of the Essene calender in Qmran shows that they celebrated the Passover on a DIFFERENT day than the PHARISEES.In 30 AD it was on a TUESDAY and the PHARISEES celebrated it a day later.So John when he said the Last Supper was BEFORE it was in reference to the PHARISEE passover,and the Synoptics would be talking about the Essene passover.

Also for a JEW then a "day and a night"was not a full 24 hr period.So just a portion into the new day counted as a "day".That should explain the "3 days and 3 nights" does not mean "3 days of 12 hrs each and 3 nights of 12 hrs each".

ABOUT THE ESSENES AGAIN:

I mentioned the Essene calender,and a different passover,what makes it more probable is that then there was an ESSENE SECTION or QUARTER in JERUSALEM.In the Synoptics Jesus tells his disciples that they will know where have the PASSOVER meal by following a MAN CARRYING a JAR.For example LUKE 22:7-12:

"Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. [8] Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, "Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover."
"Where do you want us to prepare for it?" they asked.
He replied, "As you enter the city, a MAN CARRYING A JAR OF WATER will meet you. Follow him to the house that he enters, [11] and SAY to the OWNER of the house, 'The TEACHER asks: Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?' [12] He will show you a large upper room, all furnished. Make preparations there.""

SO?
In a society like that then it was NOT the custom for men to carry water jars,it was the women who did it,who got water from the well or river for the house.But we know the ESSENES treated women well,from their writings it appears they were AGAINST POLYGAMY,as they were AGAINST SLAVERY.They numbered 4,000(not all lived in Qmran,too small for 4,000,according to Josephus,there were others who lived in the towns and cities).So an Essene man would not find it unmanly to go get water from the well.As I said before they also had their quarter in Jerusalem,for example,JOSEPHUS FLAVIUS describes three walls that surrounded Jerusalem during the First Jewish Revolt against Rome (66-70 AD) and refers to a “Gate of the Essenes”. For more info:

http://www.centuryone.org/essene.html

minoria said...

To continue:
ROBERT PRICE

More about the Lubavitchers.I quoted ROBERT PRICE(atheist,ex-Christian).He believes that a spontaneous emotion was the reason why some Lubavitchers consider rabbi SCHNEERSON,their leader,to have been GOD.
GREG BOYD thinks they got it from Christianity.For example the Lubavitchers consider ISAIAH 53 to be about the MESSIAH and apply it to Schneerson.Price says no,since they would NOT borrow from the religion they hated the most.
I think it likely that since the Lubavitchers know Hebrew and spend their time reading the Bible they were influenced by the passage in Jeremiah where it talks of the Messiah and calls him Yahweh Tsidkenu.This use of the full name of God in a personal name appears nowhere else,and has never been a Jewish custom.
So for PRICE,who believes (like RICHARD CARRIER)that Jesus most probably did NOT exist it's possible Jesus' first followers declared him GOD even though Jesus never said he was God(just like Schneerson never said he was the Messiah nor God)....based on emotion.

THE RESURRECTION BELIEF

The best skeptical argument,the only convincing one is that it was all a HALLUCINATION.For them there is no God or if there is he never intervenes(no miracles).A hallucination is when you see something that does NOT EXIST,it's in your imagination.The first disciples had a COLLECTIVE HALLUCINATION where they thought they saw Jesus phyiscally resurrected.This presupposes there was a MISSING BODY.
Later JAMES and PAUL(an enemy) had the SAME HALLUCINATION.

First of all it is very,very,very improbable (mathematical probability)that NON-BELIEVERS(James,Paul) would have the same hallucination(how many NON-LUBAVITCHERS have had a hallucination or experience and now believe Schneerson was the Messiah and God?None,I think).

But it can happen,though very improbable.Another detail is that for a COLLECTIVE HALLUCINATION to happen one of the CONDITIONS is HIGH EXPECTATION(all the people,the group,have to expect it).In the gospels the disciples at first did NOT believe it,they were not expecting it).

SPIRITUAL OR PHYSICAL RESURRECTION

CARRIER and DAN BARKER(atheist,ex-Christian) both believe that the disciples thought Jesus had been spiritually resurrected.Then the body would still be in the tomb.When you put in all the differnt details the mathematical probability of a mass hallucination of the disciples who were NOT expecting a resurrection/the SAME hallucination to a non-believer,James/and the SAME hallucination to a non-believer and ENEMY Paul it makes it very improbable,but it could have happened anyway.
That is if there is NO GOD or he never interferes.RICHARD SWINBURNE,Christian philosopher,made the calculations using BAYES' THEOREM(where he did NOT consider Biblical prophecies coinciding with Jesus),a complicated equation used to calculate probabilities and he found out the probability Jesus was resurrected by God was 97%.He wrote a book about it.

For those who are interested in the best skeptical arguments against the resurrection(and I have given their arguments here as best as I could)for the debates between GARY HABERMAS,MICHAEL LICONA,CARRIER,BARKER,HECTOR AVALOS(atheist,ex-Christian,he thinks it is a legend),CRAIG vs PRICE/LUDEMANN(atheist,ex-Christian),CROSSAN(of the Jesus Seminar) and for the debate between PRICE and BOYD on whether Jesus existed go to:

bringyou.to/apologetics/audio.htm

minoria said...

Hello Marat,you mentioned the Olivet Discourse and that it proves Jesus was a false prophet.

We know LUKE copied from MARK and that Luke-Acts is ONE BOOK.It ends in 61 AD with Paul still alive,Peter and James still alive(they died in 62 AD and 64 AD).IF JAMES were already dead Luke would have recorded it,since he records the DEATH of STEPHEN (first martyr)and also of the other JAMES(one of the 12 disciples of Jesus,but not his half-brother).He wouldhave also recorded the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem as proof that Jesus was a prophet.

THE NUMBER 40:

It appears many times in the Bible:

1)DAYS
a)Of rain, at the time of the flood
Genesis 7:17
b)Of flood, before sending forth the raven
Genesis 8:6
c)For embalming
Genesis 50:3
d)Of fasting
By Moses
Exodus 24:18; 34:28; Deuteronomy 9:9,25
By Elijah
1 Kings 19:8
By spies in the land of promise
Numbers 13:25
e)Of probation, given to the Ninevites
Jonah 3:4
By Jesus
Matthew 4:2
f)Christ's stay after the resurrection
Acts 1:3
g)Symbolical
Ezekiel 4:6
2)YEARS
a)Wanderings of the Israelites in the wilderness
Exodus 16:35; Numbers 14:34
b)Peace in Israel
Judges 3:11; 5:31; 8:28
c)Egypt to be desolated
Ezekiel 29:11
d)To be restored after
Ezekiel 29:13
3)STRIPES
Administered in punishing criminals
Deuteronomy 25:3; 2 Corinthians 11:24

SO?
Now there is what is called a BIBLICAL GENERATION which is 40 years.

The evidence indicates Jesus was killed in 30 AD,40 years later Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed.About the OLIVET DISCOURSE,a speech made by Jesus a few days before he died he said:

1.Jerusalem would be destroyed
2.The Temple also.
3.Earthquakes and famine.
4.Sign in the sky:sun would darken,moon give no more light.
5.The gospel would be preached to the entire world.
6.There is a reference to the Daniel prophecy of the abomination that causes desolation.
7.It would be a suffering like never before nor again.
8.False prophets will come.
9.Look at the FIG TREE,when it has fruit you know what time it is,and "THIS GENERATION" will see it all happen.
10.You will see the SON OF MAN return in clouds of heaven with glory.

Now Jesus often spoke in expressive ways,even using METAPHOR.Because of this the Olivet Discourse has a METAPHORICAL part and a non-metaphorical part.The metaphorical one would be "sun will darken,moon give no light"=Great Catastrophe.
The "Son of Man will come in clouds with glory" is both:
a)it refers the actual second coming of Jesus.
b)it refers to the 40 year passage of time where Jerusalem was punished.Exactly 40 years later(remember the number 40 is repeated for some reason).It destruction exactly 40 years after his death was a sign that he was no charlatan,no fraud,the expression is a metaphor for the coming of actual proof of his authenticity by a punishment exactly 40 years later.

THIS GENERATION

It has a double usage.In 30 AD there were 2 generations the one that condemned Jesus and the new one,its replacement.So "this generation" refers to the 40 year Bibblical generation that was very young in 30 AD and was still alive 40 years later.

ALSO:
Since the discourse has a double usage,a parallelism,"FIG TREE GENERATION"or "generation that will see the sign of the Fig Tree" also refers to the one that will live when the physical second coming occurs.
And the "but before the gospel will be preached to the whole world"refers to the gospel being preached before 70 AD to the whole known world(Thomas even went to India) and the world we know.

minoria said...

Hello Marat,you mentioned the Olivet Discourse and that it proves Jesus was a false prophet.

We know LUKE copied from MARK and that Luke-Acts is ONE BOOK.It ends in 61 AD with Paul still alive,Peter and James still alive(they died in 62 AD and 64 AD).IF JAMES were already dead Luke would have recorded it,since he records the DEATH of STEPHEN (first martyr)and also of the other JAMES(one of the 12 disciples of Jesus,but not his half-brother).He wouldhave also recorded the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem as proof that Jesus was a prophet.

THE NUMBER 40:

It appears many times in the Bible:

1)DAYS
a)Of rain, at the time of the flood
Genesis 7:17
b)Of flood, before sending forth the raven
Genesis 8:6
c)For embalming
Genesis 50:3
d)Of fasting
By Moses
Exodus 24:18; 34:28; Deuteronomy 9:9,25
By Elijah
1 Kings 19:8
By spies in the land of promise
Numbers 13:25
e)Of probation, given to the Ninevites
Jonah 3:4
By Jesus
Matthew 4:2
f)Christ's stay after the resurrection
Acts 1:3
g)Symbolical
Ezekiel 4:6
2)YEARS
a)Wanderings of the Israelites in the wilderness
Exodus 16:35; Numbers 14:34
b)Peace in Israel
Judges 3:11; 5:31; 8:28
c)Egypt to be desolated
Ezekiel 29:11
d)To be restored after
Ezekiel 29:13
3)STRIPES
Administered in punishing criminals
Deuteronomy 25:3; 2 Corinthians 11:24

SO?
Now there is what is called a BIBLICAL GENERATION which is 40 years.

The evidence indicates Jesus was killed in 30 AD,40 years later Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed.About the OLIVET DISCOURSE,a speech made by Jesus a few days before he died he said:

1.Jerusalem would be destroyed
2.The Temple also.
3.Earthquakes and famine.
4.Sign in the sky:sun would darken,moon give no more light.
5.The gospel would be preached to the entire world.
6.There is a reference to the Daniel prophecy of the abomination that causes desolation.
7.It would be a suffering like never before nor again.
8.False prophets will come.
9.Look at the FIG TREE,when it has fruit you know what time it is,and "THIS GENERATION" will see it all happen.
10.You will see the SON OF MAN return in clouds of heaven with glory.

Now Jesus often spoke in expressive ways,even using METAPHOR.Because of this the Olivet Discourse has a METAPHORICAL part and a non-metaphorical part.The metaphorical one would be "sun will darken,moon give no light"=Great Catastrophe.
The "Son of Man will come in clouds with glory" is both:
a)it refers the actual second coming of Jesus.
b)it refers to the 40 year passage of time where Jerusalem was punished.Exactly 40 years later(remember the number 40 is repeated for some reason).It destruction exactly 40 years after his death was a sign that he was no charlatan,no fraud,the expression is a metaphor for the coming of actual proof of his authenticity by a punishment exactly 40 years later.

THIS GENERATION

It has a double usage.In 30 AD there were 2 generations the one that condemned Jesus and the new one,its replacement.So "this generation" refers to the 40 year Bibblical generation that was very young in 30 AD and was still alive 40 years later.

ALSO:
Since the discourse has a double usage,a parallelism,"FIG TREE GENERATION"or "generation that will see the sign of the Fig Tree" also refers to the one that will live when the physical second coming occurs.
And the "but before the gospel will be preached to the whole world"refers to the gospel being preached before 70 AD to the whole known world(Thomas even went to India) and the world we know.

maratsafin said...

everyone i wouldlike you to see the minoria, the guy who answers questions that were not asked!! where on earth did i mention the olivet discourse? your generation explanantion is so pathetic i really cant belive you blieve it,but i suppose you being a preterist ( a argument only brought around the 17th century)you have to choose the best explanation that you see fit. its also desperate how you try to weave another magic number (40) into your apologetic arsenal and claiming without a shread of evidence the precise date jesus was executed we know why this is (the gospels differ).the gospel will never be preached to the whole world and never was even back then,it is near impossible,there are countless tribes in deep jungles around the world who have been recently discovered but still have no communication with the rest of the world, as for it been preached to everyone before 70 ad (another desperate answer) who preached to the aboriginal people? the ancient aztecs? the tribes in most remote parts of latin america? i have decided not to rebut your explanation for the false prophecy because it dosent warrant one.btw even indian christians are coming out and saying the myth that thomas went to india is just that,A MYTH.i will leave youwith this though,one of the strongest arguments for the opinion that the followers of jesus thought his return was iminent is the 2 letter of peter.

minoria said...

Hello Marat:
It seems you havent read some of the information I wrote.Ok,first I gave reasons for 30 AD as the year for Jesus' death.Certainly you have read that scholars are divided between 2 dates,30 AD and 33 AD(not 29 AD,31 AD,32 AD,34 AD).

THE PHRASE "Son of Man coming in clouds with glory" AGAIN:

In case you didnt know the way Jesus uses "Son of Man" it means MESSIAH,so "you will see..."is also a metaphor for"you will see I AM THE MESSIAH".And the destruction of the Temple-Jerusalem as Jesus predicted and that it was exactly 40 years later (to coincide with the repetition of the number 40 in the OT)would be PROOF he was the Messiah.

ABOUT THOMAS GOING TO INDIA
Several writers in antiquity collected the oral tradition.That he went to Persia then to India.And the disciples of Jesus' time would have understood "the entire world"as meaning what they knew then(not places like North and South America).And one must not discount it because:

WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE ORAL TRADITION THAT PETER WAS BURIED IN ROME IS VERY STRONG(we most probably have discovered his very bones)
First there was only the oral tradition,then archeological evidence (20th century)appeared:

http://www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/MG/TheTombofStPeter-1.htm

THE SAME FOR WHAT ARE MOST PROBABLY THE BONES OF LUKE
Again,based on written works that collected oral tradition and then DNA verification:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/1360095/DNA-test-pinpoints-St-Luke-the-apostles-remains-to-Padua.html

ABOUT 2 PETER 3:3-4:(Youngs literal translation)

You are refering to:

"this first knowing, that there shall come in the LATTER END OF THE DAYS (last days) scoffers, according to their own desires going on,

4and saying, `Where is the promise of his presence? for since the FATHERS did fall asleep, all things so remain from the beginning of the creation;'"

By the context he is talking about the FUTURE,not his time,since the word FATHER,according to Jewish custom,was also used to mean ANCESTOR.

EMPEROR JULIAN AND HIS ATTEMPT TO PROVE CHRISTIANITY FALSE(362 AD)

He was the Roman Emperor,he had been raised as a Christian but early stopped believing,or maybe never did.He wrote a book against Christianity called "AGAINST THE GALILEANS."He knew of Jesus' Olivet Discourse and decided to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem to prove Jesus a false prophet(and Christianity with it).But according to the EARLIEST account,by the CONTEMPORARY of Julian,an ADMIRER of Julian and also a PAGAN,the historian MARCELLINUS AMMIANUS,it could not be done because balls of fire were preventing the construction.Whether it was a coincidence(natural event) or divine intervention,the Temple was not built.

He wrote:"But, though this Alypius pushed the work on with VIGOUR, aided by the governor of the province, TERRIFYING BALLS OF FLAME kept BURSTING FORTH near the foundations of the TEMPLE, and made the place inaccessible to the workmen, some of whom were burned to death; and since in this way the element PERSISTENTLY REPELLED THEM, the enterprise halted."(Ammianus in Book 23 of his History of the Roman Empire)

http://homepages.luc.edu/~avande1/jerusalem/sources/ammianus.htm

THE STORY IS TOLD BY LATER WRITERS(Christian and Arian):

Gregory Nazianzen(Orat.vol 4)
Rufinus(Historia Ecclesiatica 1.38-39)
Sozomen (Historia Eccles. 5.22)
Theodoret(Historia Ecclest. 3.20)
Philostorgius (Hist. Ecclest.(7.9-14)

minoria said...

Hello Marat:
It seems you havent read some of the information I wrote.Ok,first I gave reasons for 30 AD as the year for Jesus' death.Certainly you have read that scholars are divided between 2 dates,30 AD and 33 AD(not 29 AD,31 AD,32 AD,34 AD).

THE PHRASE "Son of Man coming in clouds with glory" AGAIN:

In case you didnt know the way Jesus uses "Son of Man" it means MESSIAH,so "you will see..."is also a metaphor for"you will see I AM THE MESSIAH".And the destruction of the Temple-Jerusalem as Jesus predicted and that it was exactly 40 years later (to coincide with the repetition of the number 40 in the OT)would be PROOF he was the Messiah.

ABOUT THOMAS GOING TO INDIA
Several writers in antiquity collected the oral tradition.That he went to Persia then to India.And the disciples of Jesus' time would have understood "the entire world"as meaning what they knew then(not places like North and South America).And one must not discount it because:

WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE ORAL TRADITION THAT PETER WAS BURIED IN ROME IS VERY STRONG(we most probably have discovered his very bones)
First there was only the oral tradition,then archeological evidence (20th century)appeared:

http://www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/MG/TheTombofStPeter-1.htm

THE SAME FOR WHAT ARE MOST PROBABLY THE BONES OF LUKE
Again,based on written works that collected oral tradition and then DNA verification:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/1360095/DNA-test-pinpoints-St-Luke-the-apostles-remains-to-Padua.html

ABOUT 2 PETER 3:3-4:(Youngs literal translation)

You are refering to:

"this first knowing, that there shall come in the LATTER END OF THE DAYS (last days) scoffers, according to their own desires going on,

4and saying, `Where is the promise of his presence? for since the FATHERS did fall asleep, all things so remain from the beginning of the creation;'"

By the context he is talking about the FUTURE,not his time,since the word FATHER,according to Jewish custom,was also used to mean ANCESTOR.

EMPEROR JULIAN AND HIS ATTEMPT TO PROVE CHRISTIANITY FALSE(362 AD)

He was the Roman Emperor,he had been raised as a Christian but early stopped believing,or maybe never did.He wrote a book against Christianity called "AGAINST THE GALILEANS."He knew of Jesus' Olivet Discourse and decided to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem to prove Jesus a false prophet(and Christianity with it).But according to the EARLIEST account,by the CONTEMPORARY of Julian,an ADMIRER of Julian and also a PAGAN,the historian MARCELLINUS AMMIANUS,it could not be done because balls of fire were preventing the construction.Whether it was a coincidence(natural event) or divine intervention,the Temple was not built.

He wrote:"But, though this Alypius pushed the work on with VIGOUR, aided by the governor of the province, TERRIFYING BALLS OF FLAME kept BURSTING FORTH near the foundations of the TEMPLE, and made the place inaccessible to the workmen, some of whom were burned to death; and since in this way the element PERSISTENTLY REPELLED THEM, the enterprise halted."(Ammianus in Book 23 of his History of the Roman Empire)

http://homepages.luc.edu/~avande1/jerusalem/sources/ammianus.htm

THE STORY IS TOLD BY LATER WRITERS(Christian and Arian):

Gregory Nazianzen(Orat.vol 4)
Rufinus(Historia Ecclesiatica 1.38-39)
Sozomen (Historia Eccles. 5.22)
Theodoret(Historia Ecclest. 3.20)
Philostorgius (Hist. Ecclest.(7.9-14)

minoria said...

Hello Marat:
It seems you havent read some of the information I wrote.Ok,first I gave reasons for 30 AD as the year for Jesus' death.Certainly you have read that scholars are divided between 2 dates,30 AD and 33 AD(not 29 AD,31 AD,32 AD,34 AD).

THE PHRASE "Son of Man coming in clouds with glory" AGAIN:

In case you didnt know the way Jesus uses "Son of Man" it means MESSIAH,so "you will see..."is also a metaphor for"you will see I AM THE MESSIAH".And the destruction of the Temple-Jerusalem as Jesus predicted and that it was exactly 40 years later (to coincide with the repetition of the number 40 in the OT)would be PROOF he was the Messiah.

ABOUT THOMAS GOING TO INDIA
Several writers in antiquity collected the oral tradition.That he went to Persia then to India.And the disciples of Jesus' time would have understood "the entire world"as meaning what they knew then(not places like North and South America).And one must not discount it because:

WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE ORAL TRADITION THAT PETER WAS BURIED IN ROME IS VERY STRONG(we most probably have discovered his very bones)
First there was only the oral tradition,then archeological evidence (20th century)appeared:

http://www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/MG/TheTombofStPeter-1.htm

THE SAME FOR WHAT ARE MOST PROBABLY THE BONES OF LUKE
Again,based on written works that collected oral tradition and then DNA verification:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/1360095/DNA-test-pinpoints-St-Luke-the-apostles-remains-to-Padua.html

ABOUT 2 PETER 3:3-4:(Youngs literal translation)

You are refering to:

"this first knowing, that there shall come in the LATTER END OF THE DAYS (last days) scoffers, according to their own desires going on,

4and saying, `Where is the promise of his presence? for since the FATHERS did fall asleep, all things so remain from the beginning of the creation;'"

By the context he is talking about the FUTURE,not his time,since the word FATHER,according to Jewish custom,was also used to mean ANCESTOR.

EMPEROR JULIAN AND HIS ATTEMPT TO PROVE CHRISTIANITY FALSE(362 AD)

He was the Roman Emperor,he had been raised as a Christian but early stopped believing,or maybe never did.He wrote a book against Christianity called "AGAINST THE GALILEANS."He knew of Jesus' Olivet Discourse and decided to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem to prove Jesus a false prophet(and Christianity with it).But according to the EARLIEST account,by the CONTEMPORARY of Julian,an ADMIRER of Julian and also a PAGAN,the historian MARCELLINUS AMMIANUS,it could not be done because balls of fire were preventing the construction.Whether it was a coincidence(natural event) or divine intervention,the Temple was not built.

He wrote:"But, though this Alypius pushed the work on with VIGOUR, aided by the governor of the province, TERRIFYING BALLS OF FLAME kept BURSTING FORTH near the foundations of the TEMPLE, and made the place inaccessible to the workmen, some of whom were burned to death; and since in this way the element PERSISTENTLY REPELLED THEM, the enterprise halted."(Ammianus in Book 23 of his History of the Roman Empire)

http://homepages.luc.edu/~avande1/jerusalem/sources/ammianus.htm

THE STORY IS TOLD BY LATER WRITERS(Christian and Arian):

Gregory Nazianzen(Orat.vol 4)
Rufinus(Historia Ecclesiatica 1.38-39)
Sozomen (Historia Eccles. 5.22)
Theodoret(Historia Ecclest. 3.20)
Philostorgius (Hist. Ecclest.(7.9-14)

minoria said...

Hello Marat:

I know you are very skeptical about the claim that when Jesus,in the Olivet Discourse said;"You will see the Son of man coming in the clouds with glory",he was saying it in a DOUBLE sense:literal and metaphorical.

THE FIRST TIME IT WAS SAID

Skeptical scholars say Jesus was a failed apocalytic prophet,like EHRMAN.First,WHY do THEY believe Jesus ACTUALLY said he would come a second time VERY,VERY soon?In MARK,the earliest gospel CAIAPHAS ask jesus if he is the Messiah.Jesus says he is God and "And YOU (Note:YOU,CAIAPHAS) will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

THE HISTORICAL METHOD

There is the criterion of embarassment.I believe MARK is from 50 AD,the skeptics from 70-75 AD.Even taking 50 AD,20 YEARS LATER after Jesus spoke to Caiaphas,in all probability Caiaphas was DEAD,certainly by 70-75 AD.I believe LUKE and MATTHEW are from 61 AD,THEY have it too,and by 61 AD Caiaphas was DEAD.So Caiaphas never saw the second coming,Jesus was a failed apocalytic prophet.

BUT THEN WHY?

If,as is so often said,the gospel writers were INVENTING things,why did they include that passage which was COUNTER-PROPAGANDA?That is the reason why Ehrman and others accept it as authentic.Plus the same passage in the Olivet Discourse.

THE RESURRECTION

On one level Jesus told Caiaphas he would one day know he was telling the truth(that would be after Caiaphas`death,in the next life) but on another level the saying is simply a METHAPHOR for "You will see I am the Messiah and God,PROOF will be given to you".
In the same way the destruction of the Temple-Jerusalem as predicted by Jesus 40 years later was the PROOF which corroborated the same saying.

CAIAPHAS heard about the RESURRECTION of the man condemned for claiming to be GOD(Jesus was not condemned for claiming to be the Messiah).In MATTHEW he knows for certainty because the Romans soldiers were there and saw it.That was what Jesus was referring to when he spoke to Caiaphas.The skeptical scholars take it completely literaly,ignoring that when you analyze Jesus`sayings over and over again he uses a lot of METAPHORS and PARABLES.

minoria said...

Hello Maratsafin:

To finish,and believe me,it is not to win an argument for winning,because I know the evidence is not enough for you,but because I really believe there is evidence all should know anyway.

THE TALMUD AND THE TEMPLE

It was written in 500 AD but contains information from before.In the section called YOMA 39b it says God did NOT accept the sacrifices offered on the "Day of Atonement"(Yom Kippur,the most sacred Jewish day,a sacrifice done by the High Priest for the sins of the Jewish people) for 40 years before the destruction of the Temple.This was known by some signs that turned up negative for 40 years.In other words,the sacrifice was not accepted.

This is NOT an invention of mine,it appears in the Talmud,in b.Yoma 39b.You can read it here:

http://www.aaronscopeland.com/bible_texts_yoma39.html

Again,it could be a coincidence,and it is from a text that can not be said to have been a Christian forgery.

maratsafin said...

hi minoria,i argued with myself if i should respond to you and i will.
First of about the false prophecies specifically the olivet discourse. you ask the good question why would they writers put that in? because they belived it, i take you back to the dead sea scrolls, the same themes are in some of those scrolls. the dead sea scrolls were written around and before that time. those writing the gospels specifiaclly the synopitcs (the earliest ones hence the reason john the last one doesnt have the olivet doiscourse)really thought they were that generation and every generation after that thought they were that generation and these passages were kept for a few reason 1) they belived it to be inspired so they could not change it 2) only a few could read back then so the general populace didnt really have a clue of what was in the bible except for what thier priests,bishops told them.3) those that knew it was a problem but belived the excuse the 2nd peter so they just didnt think much of it.alos at this stage i have to mention that letter again, if jesus meant what YOU AND PRETERIST want him to be meaning then the holy spirit inspired 2nd letter of peterwould have written something to that effect, but all he says is be patient and gives a out of context quote out of psalms. alsoi really do wish you read all of matthew chapter 24 FULLY,verse 30 all the earth shall mourn and see him coming WITH GREAT POWER AND GLORY!! not just jerusalem!
verse 31, the angel shall sound the trumpet and jesus shall gather all his elect!!!! if that happened then you most certainly do not follow the right christianity!!!! think about it. verse 34 needs no elaboration,verse 36-37 shows exactly why this passage is talking about the end of the world. verse 36,only the father knows of the HOUR!!! and verse 37 it will be like in the days of noah!! when he destroyed the world but for a select few!!!!! but it is just not the olivet discourse where makes these claims,he repeatedly says the kingdom of God is at hand and some of them will see him establish it luke 9:26-27 (please dont he is talkig about the transfiguration because that makes no sense) but it is just not the new testament jesus it is those that wrote the letters especially paul in his letters to corinth,thessalonica,romans also 1 peter.actually most of the letters have that sort of theme, and then you have the book of revelation right from the first verse it says all the things he prophecieses must SOON come to pass. there is just no escape from these passages that is why you either ignore them ( more or less what the author of 2nd peter was telling everyone)or come up with the best explanation to ease you doubts,which is were the preterists come in, although a close examination of the tells you why that reason is wrong. but you dont need the false prophecies of the nt to prove it wrong,the doctrines and theology of the OT and the NT are not easily reconciled. most probably that is the reason why gnostics belived there were 2 different Gods in the OT and NT.
and to your statement about the ribbon not turning white 40 years before the destruction, you may find this answer interesting
http://www.outreachjudaism.org/Yomkippur.html

maratsafin said...

hi minoria,i argued with myself if i should respond to you and i will.
First of about the false prophecies specifically the olivet discourse. you ask the good question why would they writers put that in? because they belived it, i take you back to the dead sea scrolls, the same themes are in some of those scrolls. the dead sea scrolls were written around and before that time. those writing the gospels specifiaclly the synopitcs (the earliest ones hence the reason john the last one doesnt have the olivet doiscourse)really thought they were that generation and every generation after that thought they were that generation and these passages were kept for a few reason 1) they belived it to be inspired so they could not change it 2) only a few could read back then so the general populace didnt really have a clue of what was in the bible except for what thier priests,bishops told them.3) those that knew it was a problem but belived the excuse the 2nd peter so they just didnt think much of it.alos at this stage i have to mention that letter again, if jesus meant what YOU AND PRETERIST want him to be meaning then the holy spirit inspired 2nd letter of peterwould have written something to that effect, but all he says is be patient and gives a out of context quote out of psalms. alsoi really do wish you read all of matthew chapter 24 FULLY,verse 30 all the earth shall mourn and see him coming WITH GREAT POWER AND GLORY!! not just jerusalem!
verse 31, the angel shall sound the trumpet and jesus shall gather all his elect!!!! if that happened then you most certainly do not follow the right christianity!!!! think about it. verse 34 needs no elaboration,verse 36-37 shows exactly why this passage is talking about the end of the world. verse 36,only the father knows of the HOUR!!! and verse 37 it will be like in the days of noah!! when he destroyed the world but for a select few!!!!! but it is just not the olivet discourse where makes these claims,he repeatedly says the kingdom of God is at hand and some of them will see him establish it luke 9:26-27 (please dont he is talkig about the transfiguration because that makes no sense) but it is just not the new testament jesus it is those that wrote the letters especially paul in his letters to corinth,thessalonica,romans also 1 peter.actually most of the letters have that sort of theme, and then you have the book of revelation right from the first verse it says all the things he prophecieses must SOON come to pass. there is just no escape from these passages that is why you either ignore them ( more or less what the author of 2nd peter was telling everyone)or come up with the best explanation to ease you doubts,which is were the preterists come in, although a close examination of the tells you why that reason is wrong. but you dont need the false prophecies of the nt to prove it wrong,the doctrines and theology of the OT and the NT are not easily reconciled. most probably that is the reason why gnostics belived there were 2 different Gods in the OT and NT.
and to your statement about the ribbon not turning white 40 years before the destruction, you may find this answer interesting
http://www.outreachjudaism.org/Yomkippur.html

minoria said...

Hello Maratsafin:

In the link about the Talmud you gave it is agreed that the sacrifice signs were negative.The answer was that it was because the Jews were fighting among themselves.The strange thing is that it has a 40 year time period.From your comment it appears you accept Jesus actually said the Son of Man prophecy in the Olivet Discourse.
As I said before it has a PARALLEL application,it is also about the physical appearence of Jesus when there is a literal preaching to the world.So the Fig Tree generation part has a parallel application.
One application is that it made the punishment of Jerusaem coincide with 40 years,by then the known regions of the world have been preached to.Certainly that is proof.Today all the regions of the world have been preached to,not every inhabitant,but every region.

THE TRANSFIGURATION("see the kingdom of God arrive with glory and power")
You dont accept Jesus also had that in mind when he said to his disciples that some of them would not die before seeing him in glory.I already gave you the example of him saying something similar to CAIAPHAS and how it was metaphorical for PROOF that he was God,the proof being the resurrection.Skeptical scholars believe it is authentic,I gave you the reasons,that he made such a statement to the priest.

JESUS' PROPHECY ABOUT THE SECOND COMING

Ok,in LUKE 13:34-35 Jesus when entering Jerusalem says he WILL NOT come back till the people of Jerusalem accept him as Messiah:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which kills the prophets, and stones them that are sent to you; how often would I have gathered your children together, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Behold, your house is left to you desolate: and verily I say to you, YOU WILL NOT SEE ME TILL when you will say, "Blessed is HE(referring to himself,Jesus)that comes in the name of the Lord."

That did not happen in 70 AD.Jesus made it CONDITIONAL and 40 years passed and nothing.But to MAKE SURE people knew he was a real prophet the punishment came 40 years later.That is PROOF.If the Jewish people had accepted Jesus by 70 AD the second coming would have occured.

But there is another prophecy that is related to the second coming indirectly since it says that after a CERTAIN NUMBER of NON-JEWS believe,the JEWS will begin to believe.

PAUL'S PROPHECY ABOUT THE JEWS ACCEPTING JESUS

In 1970 only 2,000 Jewish people believed in Jesus as Messiah,but in 40 years the number has gone to about 250,000.Before there had been conversions,like in Germany in the 19th century,I think about 200,000 but they were almost always for social mobility reasons,for example the case of Karl Marx's father and Disraeli's father,the case of Heine.Or there were forced conversions(50,000 in Spain in 1391).

ROMANS 11:25-26:

"I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: ISRAEL(NOTE:the Jewish people) has experienced a hardening in part TILL THE FULL NUMBER OF GENTILES HAS COME IN(note:will accept Jesus as Messiah), and in this way ALL ISRAEL WILL BE SAVED(note:the Jewish people will believe in Jesus)."

So the prophecy is CONDITIONAL and we see that as more and more Gentiles accept Jesus more and more Jews are also,the "hardening" is disappearing.

ABOUT PAUL AGAIN

You said he believed in the imminent coming of the second coming,he had LUKE as his traveling COMPANION so he knew of the LUKE 13:34-35 prophecy by Jesus,so he knew it was CONDITIONAL,he knew the details of the Olivet Discourse also and God had revealed to him that Luke 13:34-35 depended on the conversion of many Gentiles.
The point is that you have accepted the skeptical argument that prophecies,real ones,are impossible,so Jesus NEVER said Jerusalem-Temple would be destroyed (it was INVENTED and put in Jesus' mouth)and place Luke-Acts at 80-85 AD(so Paul never knew of LUKE 13:34-35).I had given reasons for accepting 61 AD in other posts.

minoria said...

To answer more fully:

There is MATT 10:5-8 where Jesus send the 12 disciples to preach to the JEWS and NOT to the SAMARITANS and PAGANS.
Then in MATT 10:23 he says they will NOT finish preaching in the "cities of the Jews" before they see the "Son of Man comes".
It is the basic form of what Jesus said to CAIAPHAS:"You will see the SOn of Man come".
Then in MALACHY 4:5 it says ELIJAH will come before the "day of Yahweh comes".And he did,in the Transfiguration.Skeptical scholars always say MATT 10:23 means the Second coming,so another proof Jesus was a failed apocalyptic prophet,and since they believe MATT is from 80-85 AD (when the 12 were all dead,according to them)it is AUTHENTIC(criterion of embarassment).
"Son of Man coming" has a double usage,one metaphorical(the equivalent of saying there will be PROOF Jesus was who he was) another literal.For Caiaphas and in Matt 10:23,plus I believe in Malachy 4:5 it refers to the RESURRECTION.Because MATT 28 has Jesus sending the disciples to "all the nations".Certainly the AUTHOR who wrote the book considered "son of man coming"in MATT 10:23 as having been ccomplished BEFORE the Great Commission.He was not troubled.

maratsafin said...

minoria, i debated with myself if i should respond to you, because as i gave you verse by verse rebuttals all you did was restate your preterist position which is unbiblical and from what i read none of the early church fathers held a preterist view and again i state if what jesus meant what you want him so desperately to mean then 2nd peter would have said somethibg to that effect but the fact he doesnt and the fact that he acknowledges people thought he,jesus, was gonna come back within that generation only makes the argument that the new testament jesus was a apocalyptic preacher much stronger.
you say the reason jerusalem was destroyed was because they rejected the messiah,i wouldnt want to disagree with you may be it was destroyed because of that, but what if it was destroyed because of the killing of John the baptist? where as crucifxion of jesus took before or at 33AD John the baptist was beheaded before jesus was killed so the mandaeans could easily claim like you do that it was because the killing of john why jerusalem was destroyed not jesus. and that 40 year gneration or whatever you hypothesise could easily be applied there as well!!! Ithink josepheus says something like that but i dont if i can trust that passage since it comes as the same time as the infamous other passage.
you then gave a quote out of malachi again you either ignored the whole chapter (its really small so i think you ) or you chose to do it on purpose like the author of the gospel who uses that prophecy but only part of it. look at the whole passage and i tell you it destroys the whole jesus is messiah because he didnt fufill anything. I willtry tosummarise it for you,verse 1 talks about the messenger of the covenant coming before the messiah appears,this messenger is elijah coming in the form of john the baptist as you say.verse 2 describes in a few words what the messiah will do. verse 3 tells you he will purify ( in other words teach them the proper way) the sons of levi so that they may carry out the sacrfices with righteousness!!! it goes on tosay how israel has stopped doing the worksof law and how that it has angered the lord of israel because ofthier actions, but it states if they start carrying them out again he will return to them and then verse 22 he tells them toremeber the LAWOF MOSES WHICH HE COMMANDED TO MOSES!!!this why say they gospel writers were witty and clever they pick and chose and mostly twisted certain passages to convince people of thier message. btw i got kid of confused when you referenced malachi 4:5 because i go to the translation by this website http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0.htm for the hebrew bible and they dont have a chapter 4 but what is chapter 4 in your bible is all in chapter 3 anyway the confusion was quiclky cleared up. i wont rebut your claim that jesus will only reurn when the jews accept him,because different gospels say different things and the book of revelation mnakes it clear that they ,the jews ,will be follwers of the anti-christ.true jews convert to christianity but they convert to a number of different religions,majority of them stick with thier own or have no belief at all. cont below

maratsafin said...

also i have to contend wi the issue that all the disciples went over the world before 70AD because that is impossible and to belive that you will have to erase the history of those that have thousand upon thousands of years it in places like the americas, austrailia,china,indoneisa etc because the apostles certainly never reached there before 70AD and thus which ever way you try to play it the prophecy always fails. also the prophecy in matthew 16 and luke 9 and mark 9 are failures because the precding verses tell of how he will reject those that rejected him when he comes in GLORY OF THE FATHER AND THE HOLY ANGELS. also look at the text he says some of them shall still be alive when he comes but if you claim 9 absurdly in my view) that he was somehow talking about the transfiguration tha why does he mention that some of them will not atse death?? why mention death at all? if its going to happen only 6 or 8 days later??? why not make it easier for people like you todefent by just saying something like this " i will show some of you a glimpse of the kingdom"?? see it dosent work, another prophetic failure.

minoria said...

Hello Mratsafin:
You mentioned the words that came before the Transfiguration "glory with the Father and his ANGELS".In HEBREW MALAKH means "messenger",it can be HUMAN or CELESTIAL.

ELIJAH in the OT NEVER died.NABI is the word translated as "prophet",it also means messenger.In the TRANSFIGURATION we have the "messengers/angels(from "angelos",Greek for "messenger")MOSES and ELIJAH.The essence of the phrase Jesus said was that some of the disciples with him would be given PROOF(the Transfiguration).THEY understood then Jesus was the real thing.

ABOUT MALACHY:

In JEREMIAH 33:14-18 there is a prophecy about the Messiah(all agree)and it has SACRIFICES in the TEMPLE by LEVITES.There are 2 kinds of sacrifices in Mosaic law:for sins and for THANKSGIVING.
The ATONEMENT does not exclude having thanksgiving sacrifices.
MALACHY 4:4 says to remmeber Mosaic Law,yes,but DEUT 18:15-19 talks of a "prophet like Moses" 2X.

JESUS SAID HE WAS THE ONE PROPHESIZED BY MOSES:
It's in JOHN 5:45-47/LUKE 24:25-27 and LUKE 24:44-45.

minoria said...

PART 1

ABOUT MALACHY:

In JEREMIAH 33:14-18 there is a prophecy about the Messiah(all agree)and it has SACRIFICES in the TEMPLE by LEVITES.There are 2 kinds of sacrifices in Mosaic law:for sins and for THANKSGIVING.
The ATONEMENT does not exclude having thanksgiving sacrifices.
MALACHY 4:4 says to remmeber Mosaic Law,yes,but DEUT 18:15-19 talks of a "prophet like Moses" 2X.

JESUS SAID HE WAS THE ONE PROPHESIZED BY MOSES:
It's in JOHN 5:45-47/LUKE 24:25-27 and LUKE 24:44-45.

ABOUT THE TALMUD AGAIN

Before,you said maybe God didn't accept the Yom Kippur sacrifices because of John-Baptist instead of because of Jesus,why not because of both?

Assuming its information that for 40 YEARS the YOM KIPPUR sacrifice(for the sins of the Jews) was rejected is true,then WHY did God REJECT them in 39 AD?Was THE FOLLOWING not enough?

CALIGULA STATUE
In 39 AD Emperor GAIUS CALGULA ordered HIS OWN STATUE to be put in the TEMPLE of Jerusalem.We have info from PHILO(greatest Jewish teacher then,who was sent to Rome to persuade him not to),who wrote about it.And from JOSEPHUS(Jewish Antiquities 18/Jewish War,2).Josephus gives a very touching story,how TENS of THOUSANDS of Jews told the governor they would let themselves be KILLED PEACEFULLY(non-violent resistance,Gandhi,Martin Luther King-style)rather that let the statue be put in.They would become MARTYRS for GOD(from the Antiquities):

minoria said...

PART 2:
Here is the citation from Josephus:

CALIGULA STATUE
In 39 AD Emperor GAIUS CALGULA ordered HIS OWN STATUE to be put in the TEMPLE of Jerusalem.We have info from PHILO(greatest Jewish teacher then,who was sent to Rome to persuade him not to),who wrote about it.And from JOSEPHUS(Jewish Antiquities 18/Jewish War,2).Josephus gives a very touching story,how TENS of THOUSANDS of Jews told the governor they would let themselves be KILLED PEACEFULLY(non-violent resistance,Gandhi,Martin Luther King-style)rather that let the statue be put in.They would become MARTYRS for GOD(from the Antiquities):

"Gaius Caligula dispatched Petronius as his legate to Syria. He ordered Petronius to lead a large force into Judaea and, if the Jews consented to receive him, to set up an image of Gaius in the Temple. If they refused, Petronius was to subdue them by force of arms and so set up the statue. Petronius hastened to carry out the commands of the emperor. He marched two or three legions to Ptolemais, intending to spend the winter there and towards spring to engage in war. Meanwhile, TENS OF THOUSANDS of Jews came to Petronius at Ptolemais with petitions not to use force to make them transgress and violate their ancestral code. They said, "If you propose at all costs to set up the image, SLAY US FIRST before you carry out these resolutions. For it is not possible for us to survive and to behold actions that are forbidden us by the decision both of our lawgiver and of our ancestors. ... In order to preserve our ancestral code, we shall patiently endure what may be in store for us... for God will stand by us; Fortune, moreover, is wont to veer now toward one side, now toward the other in human affairs."

Petronius saw that they were determined and that it would be impossible to carry out Gaius' order without great conflict and slaughter. He went to Tiberias to determine the situation of the Jews there. Again, many TENS OF THOUSANDS faced Petronius on his arrival. They besought him to not put up the statue. "Will you then go to war with Caesar, regardless of his resources and of your own weakness?" he asked. "ON NO ACCOUNT WOULD WE FIGHT," they said, "but we will die sooner than violate our laws." And falling on their faces and baring their throats, they declared that they were ready to be slain. They continued to make these supplications for forty days. Furthermore, they neglected their fields even though this was the time to sow the seed. For they showed a stubborn determination and readiness to die rather than to see the image erected.

Then members of the royal family and civic leaders appealed to Petronius to refrain from the plan and instead to write to Gaius telling how incurable was their opposition to receiving the statue and how they had left their fields to sit as a protest, and THAT THEY DID NOT CHOOSE WAR,since they could not fight a war, but would be GLAD TO DIE SOONER THAN TRANSGRESS THEIR CUSTOMS, and that since the land was unsown there would be no harvest and no tribute. They brought pressure to bear upon him in every way and employed every device to make their plea effective. Petronius was influenced by their plea, and saw the stubborn determination of the Jews, and thought it would be terrible to bring death on so many tens of thousands of people. He thought it best to risk sending a letter to Gaius. Perhaps he might even convince him to cancel the order. If not, he would undertake war against the Jews. And thus Petronius decided to recognize the cogency of the plea of the petitioners."

SOURCE:http://www.beki.org/resistance.html

minoria said...

PART 2:
Here is the citation from Josephus:

CALIGULA STATUE
In 39 AD Emperor GAIUS CALGULA ordered HIS OWN STATUE to be put in the TEMPLE of Jerusalem.We have info from PHILO(greatest Jewish teacher then,who was sent to Rome to persuade him not to),who wrote about it.And from JOSEPHUS(Jewish Antiquities 18/Jewish War,2).Josephus gives a very touching story,how TENS of THOUSANDS of Jews told the governor they would let themselves be KILLED PEACEFULLY(non-violent resistance,Gandhi,Martin Luther King-style)rather that let the statue be put in.They would become MARTYRS for GOD(from the Antiquities):

"Gaius Caligula dispatched Petronius as his legate to Syria. He ordered Petronius to lead a large force into Judaea and, if the Jews consented to receive him, to set up an image of Gaius in the Temple. If they refused, Petronius was to subdue them by force of arms and so set up the statue. Petronius hastened to carry out the commands of the emperor. He marched two or three legions to Ptolemais, intending to spend the winter there and towards spring to engage in war. Meanwhile, TENS OF THOUSANDS of Jews came to Petronius at Ptolemais with petitions not to use force to make them transgress and violate their ancestral code. They said, "If you propose at all costs to set up the image, SLAY US FIRST before you carry out these resolutions. For it is not possible for us to survive and to behold actions that are forbidden us by the decision both of our lawgiver and of our ancestors. ... In order to preserve our ancestral code, we shall patiently endure what may be in store for us... for God will stand by us; Fortune, moreover, is wont to veer now toward one side, now toward the other in human affairs."

Petronius saw that they were determined and that it would be impossible to carry out Gaius' order without great conflict and slaughter. He went to Tiberias to determine the situation of the Jews there. Again, many TENS OF THOUSANDS faced Petronius on his arrival. They besought him to not put up the statue. "Will you then go to war with Caesar, regardless of his resources and of your own weakness?" he asked. "ON NO ACCOUNT WOULD WE FIGHT," they said, "but we will die sooner than violate our laws." And falling on their faces and baring their throats, they declared that they were ready to be slain. They continued to make these supplications for forty days. Furthermore, they neglected their fields even though this was the time to sow the seed. For they showed a stubborn determination and readiness to die rather than to see the image erected.

Then members of the royal family and civic leaders appealed to Petronius to refrain from the plan and instead to write to Gaius telling how incurable was their opposition to receiving the statue and how they had left their fields to sit as a protest, and THAT THEY DID NOT CHOOSE WAR,since they could not fight a war, but would be GLAD TO DIE SOONER THAN TRANSGRESS THEIR CUSTOMS, and that since the land was unsown there would be no harvest and no tribute. They brought pressure to bear upon him in every way and employed every device to make their plea effective. Petronius was influenced by their plea, and saw the stubborn determination of the Jews, and thought it would be terrible to bring death on so many tens of thousands of people. He thought it best to risk sending a letter to Gaius. Perhaps he might even convince him to cancel the order. If not, he would undertake war against the Jews. And thus Petronius decided to recognize the cogency of the plea of the petitioners."

SOURCE:http://www.beki.org/resistance.html

minoria said...

PART 2:
Here is the citation from Josephus:

CALIGULA STATUE
In 39 AD Emperor GAIUS CALGULA ordered HIS OWN STATUE to be put in the TEMPLE of Jerusalem.We have info from PHILO(greatest Jewish teacher then,who was sent to Rome to persuade him not to),who wrote about it.And from JOSEPHUS(Jewish Antiquities 18/Jewish War,2).Josephus gives a very touching story,how TENS of THOUSANDS of Jews told the governor they would let themselves be KILLED PEACEFULLY(non-violent resistance,Gandhi,Martin Luther King-style)rather that let the statue be put in.They would become MARTYRS for GOD(from the Antiquities):

"Gaius Caligula dispatched Petronius as his legate to Syria. He ordered Petronius to lead a large force into Judaea and, if the Jews consented to receive him, to set up an image of Gaius in the Temple. If they refused, Petronius was to subdue them by force of arms and so set up the statue. Petronius hastened to carry out the commands of the emperor. He marched two or three legions to Ptolemais, intending to spend the winter there and towards spring to engage in war. Meanwhile, TENS OF THOUSANDS of Jews came to Petronius at Ptolemais with petitions not to use force to make them transgress and violate their ancestral code. They said, "If you propose at all costs to set up the image, SLAY US FIRST before you carry out these resolutions. For it is not possible for us to survive and to behold actions that are forbidden us by the decision both of our lawgiver and of our ancestors. ... In order to preserve our ancestral code, we shall patiently endure what may be in store for us... for God will stand by us; Fortune, moreover, is wont to veer now toward one side, now toward the other in human affairs."

Petronius saw that they were determined and that it would be impossible to carry out Gaius' order without great conflict and slaughter. He went to Tiberias to determine the situation of the Jews there. Again, many TENS OF THOUSANDS faced Petronius on his arrival. They besought him to not put up the statue. "Will you then go to war with Caesar, regardless of his resources and of your own weakness?" he asked. "ON NO ACCOUNT WOULD WE FIGHT," they said, "but we will die sooner than violate our laws." And falling on their faces and baring their throats, they declared that they were ready to be slain. They continued to make these supplications for forty days. Furthermore, they neglected their fields even though this was the time to sow the seed. For they showed a stubborn determination and readiness to die rather than to see the image erected.

Then members of the royal family and civic leaders appealed to Petronius to refrain from the plan and instead to write to Gaius telling how incurable was their opposition to receiving the statue and how they had left their fields to sit as a protest, and THAT THEY DID NOT CHOOSE WAR,since they could not fight a war, but would be GLAD TO DIE SOONER THAN TRANSGRESS THEIR CUSTOMS, and that since the land was unsown there would be no harvest and no tribute. They brought pressure to bear upon him in every way and employed every device to make their plea effective. Petronius was influenced by their plea, and saw the stubborn determination of the Jews, and thought it would be terrible to bring death on so many tens of thousands of people. He thought it best to risk sending a letter to Gaius. Perhaps he might even convince him to cancel the order. If not, he would undertake war against the Jews. And thus Petronius decided to recognize the cogency of the plea of the petitioners."

SOURCE:http://www.beki.org/resistance.html

1moremuslim said...

Minoria :
Do you believe in sola scriptura?

maratsafin said...

hi minoria, i think the dialogue has come to its end,its been pretty good mannered and i hope you were not offended by whatever i wrote. the last post may have been difficult to understand because i was in a rush and so when i posted it the comment and re-read my post it had so many typos but i think you got the gist of it. but i will respond to your weak explanation of what kind of sacrifices malachi was talking about if it was either thanksgiving or atonement ( i belive it was both) but i see why you have to make just thanks giving because otherwise the crucifixion of jesus would have been for nothing,but i do believe the whole torah backs the argument i am making instead of the one christians would like to believe. like i aid before readthe whole chapter,malachi chapter 3 verse 4 after telling how the messiah will teach the levites how to sacrfice again,verse 4 tells you how the offering will be like before when he was pleased with judah and jerusalem. so the question is did they just to thanksgiving sacrfices before or did they keep every single lawof moses? the latter is the only answer. Also it is confusing for me ( and i think who ever you got that apologetic answer from it must be confusing for you) because why would there be any sort of sacrfices when jesus returns according to christian theology?? it makes no sense,also the added problem with this answer is that why would the levites only have the ability to sacrfice?? why not anyone?? you know at this moment there are so many questions swirling around my head because of the answer you gave but i will let it pass because i dont think you have the answers for them. any way this is my last post.