By Ted Belman
From now on comments on every post must relate to the content of the post.
Comments that don’t relate to the post must go here.
Any person who contravenes this demand will be put on moderation. Also their offending comment will be trashed.
The reason for this demand is so that people who want to read comments which pertain to the post, don’t have to wade through the chatter.
Everyone will be happier.
dweller Said:
Deceitful little man!
the axe they grind is nothing to do with their membership but is the same axe they grinded over the 2000 years of libeling, swindling, torturing and slaughtering Jews and revising their bible. A 2000 year despicable behavior which you appear to overlook here as being “AN AXE TO GRIND”. They have a vested interest in deceit and have practiced that deceit for 2000 years while killing Jews. You are a fraud.
dweller Said:
I also have not established that “rapunzel is mythology, but like the gospel, rapunzel and roger rabbit the existence of the gospel characters and narrative are neither authenticated nor supported by Jewish sources and I would hardly take the word of the 2000 year serial liars and murderers of the Jewish people for those facts.
dweller Said:
baloney as usual, no reason to make such a ridiculous assumption, its in your mind. Followers of a person, creed, theory are often named after the person, its the common usage AND the dictionary definition.
dweller Said:
you are wrong and the dictionaries are right, and furthermore you asked my definition and I agree with the dictionaries.
but you cited christians as existing in 64 CE, they were as everyone states christian before the nicene creed.
dweller Said:
take it up with the dictionaries and those using it since the first christians neighbors used it. DUH, follower of christ equals christian, DUH again.
dweller Said:
Pure lies, the citation mentioned the NT and not the neighbors, you made up that bit of BS about neighbors, give a citation for that. the citation states: “The New Testament mentions….” DUH?
you are frantically grasping for any straws.
dweller Said:
Your logic is ridiculous… whatever christ called his followers before his death has nothing to do with what those followers and others called themselves after his death. DUH… followers of christ = Christians.
Bernard Ross Said:
Yes, the dictionaries the encyclopedias, common usage, etc are all wrong and Dweller (LOL) is right 😛 😛 😛
dweller Said:
Would you like some cheese to go with your deceitful little whine or a hanky to dry your Pauline tears? Liars deserve malevolence. 😛 😛 😛 you are ludicrous!
dweller Said:
Those who make the claim that it’s not mythology and historical fact must prove and substantiate their claim. It’s not up to the skeptic and non believer to prove theirs.
You do not have an historical basis to substantiate your claims and the objective weight of evidence is against you and your claims. It boils down to faith and that’s not proof or evidence. Just the facts ‘Harvey’,
Then the truth will set you free. Veritas vos liberabit
@ bernard ross:
Of course they do, in the sense that they have an interest in determining the basis of their membership. Are YOU suggesting that they shouldn’t be able to determine and maintain their own standards, like any other “club” or institution?
— Maybe you would leave THAT up to the publishers of dictionaries???
Your self-serving arrogance is BEYOND astounding — it’s downright offensive: You think that as a Jew you have the option to determine who is and isn’t a Jew — yet you deny that same prerogative of self-identification to the Christian community.
This is the height of chutzpa.
You have YET to establish that the gospel accounts constitute ‘mythology,’ and ONLY mythology — and the actual joke here is your pitiful, paper-thin attempt to keep the awareness of the matter at bay so you won’t have to look at it for yourself. It’s obvious that you’re simply FRIGHTENED. You’re a religious bigot and intellectual coward to boot.
Fear is the price that dishonest persons PAY for their dishonesty.
@ bernard ross:
What ‘facts’ have I forgotten?
You should know.
If that were the case, then Christ would have called them by that name. Never did.
I told you: the Nicene Creed is far more specific, and mere belief in JC as Moshiach is insufficient to be a Christian. If one doesn’t believe that Christ is ‘God,’ then he/she cannot be a Christian. If you don’t like the fact that this doesn’t fit your scheme, take it up with the Christian community. Maybe they’ll change things to please you.
“At Antioch, yes. But not by themselves nor among themselves. Only by their non-believing neighbors, who constantly overheard them referring to Christ-this, Christ-that & Christ-the-other-thing — so those neighbors simply assumed that these people must be . . . ‘Christians’. [Du-uh!]
They never used it for themselves, however, because Christ himself had never called them (or anybody else) ‘Christians.’ Those who loved him he called his friends . Nothing else. Among themselves, they referred to their belief as ‘The Way’…”
Yes, like you, they acted out of their ignorance.
Of course, you have more than ignorance motivating you.
You also have malevolence.
@ bernard ross:
Poor Poor thing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Sq-g-UXuMk
dweller Said:
On the contrary, you are well versed in deception, lies, marketing, AND just like your church what you “are telling me” is suspect and without credibility.
dweller Said:
they cribbed the jewish bible and then revised it tosuit their needs and fraud. Didnt you know….. If you dont know what Jews know, I wont do your homework..long lists have been posted prior on this site.
dweller Said:
dweller Said:
an excellent rendition of you…. 🙂
dweller Said:
dont need to read fairy tale sayings to know that sayings do not a fact create… you claim his existence because persons unknown and unproven made brilliant sayings (LOL)
dweller Said:
no need… the existence of a fairy tale does not make the fairy tale real.
dweller Said:
😛 😛 😛
dweller Said:
I do not gravitate to the Jew killers and liars for my info about Jews, unlike you.
dweller Said:
DUH… the existence of sayings ascribed to mythical characters does not prove the existence of those characters…. basic logic.
dweller Said:
like yourself, who claims that “brilliant sayings” in a fairy tale make the fairy tale characters real….. 😛
dweller Said:
Unproven, but more important: IRRELEVANT!! A red herring thrown in by you to deceive. Christian sources are the only source for this statement. There is no jewish source which proves that the “gospels” and NT were attested to or supported by Jews or that Jesus or his disciples ever existed in reality. Do not confuse a possible authorship by jews with being a jewish source in terms of validating the claims of the gospels or nt. Jews have written fiction, novels, propaganda, fairy tales before and since… its irrelevant AND unproven. You should revisit the film which shows you how this can be done. The characters in the gospels an NT have not been shown to exist and therefore their assertions are as meaningless as the assertions of roger rabbit.
dweller Said:
rubbish, I never mentioned the gospels as a key. the key is showing a correlation between the behavior and declarations of christians, their orgs, their churches, etc. and the persecution of the jews. I dont care what dogma or the nazis followed in their minds… I only care what they they clearly said and did. The same is true of the christians and the christian churches.
dweller Said:
there is no assertion of yours which I would take at face value as you demonstrate the same deceitful MO as those you seek to defend.
dweller Said:
I am not interested in whether the followers of Jesus, the christians, their churches, etc adhered to their dogma or not. I merely observe that the christians and their churches have been libeling, swindling, torturing, slaughtering, revising the bible of, defaming and delegitimizing, Jews for 2000 years and still doing it today. Their dogma has been claimed by them consistently as the basis for their despicable, serial and institutionalized behavior over the 2 milleniums. Do I care whether they scrupulously followed their dogma… NO!!!!!
Those like yourself have an invested need in pretending that real christians didnt do the dirty deeds…. its a lie… billions of real christians did the dirty deeds AND it was their despicable libels of their dogmas which was used as the basis for those deeds. they are the “real” christians. The others are seeking, like you, to prop up the castle of sand with fake stories of ……
“IT WASN’T ME” !:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pslgz9o8meM
dweller Said:
MONEY CHANGERS
christian version a lot of BS, Money changers were outside the Temple grounds as archeological finds have discovered the stalls in the Prado. They were a necessary function of the Temple services and support system. There was also competition between them preventing exploitation in fees. You jesus guy as depicted in the narrative was no more than a mad fanatic violent criminal who deserved to be hung. It was he who acted with violence within the Temple grounds a crime punishable with death by stoning immediately by any Jew.
He was a common criminal who destroyed private property and caused loses to legal businessmen and their livelihood…
Only your mythical freak seemed to be bothered by the activities of these legal and necessary businesses.
What’s so freaking noble about him???? A mad schmuck?
Never happened in reality though I am referring to your unsupported stupid narrative.
dweller Said:
The sayings, words and opinions of your mythical roger rabbit and yourself have absolutely nothing to do with the whether the mythical roger rabbit, JPandera composite, your nitzri ever actually even existed. dweller Said:
Hilarious bit of revision and doublespeak 😛 😛 😛
“Christians and Christianity” cannot be conveniently altered, for the sake of your deceptive marketing, to read as “authors of the gospel”
Whoever “authored the gospel” is irrelevant to the 2000 year libeling, swindling,torturing, slaughtering of the Jews. That is your Pauline red herring, a characteristic of your cult, thrown in to distract from WHO DID THE DIRTY DEEDS!!!! DUH… the christians did it, we all know that but you appear to pretend ignorance or to obfuscate that fact.
dweller Said:
the commentaries, whether ascribed to your nitzri or roger rabbit are irrelevant to whether either character actually existed or were fabricated fairy tales. Its simple logic. Who wrote or said them is undetermined AND irrelevant. Whether roger rabit actually said something brilliant or dumb does not prove his existence in the real world, the author of his character put it in his cartoon mouth. DUH????
dweller Said:
are you afflicted with ADD? DUH??? Christian sources are sources which are christian… I have given you multiple definitions of “christian” which all relate to Jesus.
dweller Said:
the popular acceptance of a “fact” does not a fact make. However, once more it is a red herring which even if true merely attests to the fact that jews might be capable of writing fiction, fairy tales, myths, cartoons etc. the authorship of the NT does not give credence to the existence of the Jesus character.
dweller Said:
an irrelevant tangent inserted to obfuscate by YOU! The NT authorship is irrelevant to the existence of the Jesus character. There are no jewish sources which attest to the existence of the character, his virgin birth, his resurrection, his second coming, his Jewish messiahship, etc.
You are going in circles, creating tangents and obfuscation, confusing fiction with reality, propaganda with truth, accepting the attestation of known liars and jew killers and touting the assertions of those known liars and jew killers here to Jews on this site. You have become your Pauline marketing idol.
dweller Said:
You are the ONE who regularly and conveniently FORGETS facts by piling a mountain of obfuscating Pauline garbage on top of the facts. You appear to be drunk on your “roger rabbit” cartoon character, with sayings, and unable to clearly see.
dweller Said:
It matters not what lying deceivers and Pauline “marketers” call themselves. Liars tend to tell lies, like the Christian churches, and their followers, over 2000 years.
bernard ross Said:
I emboldened the relevant definitions to make it simple and clear for even your Pauline “marketing”. 🙂
dweller Said:
😛 😛 😛 not dictionaries? I wonder who you think would give a more objective definition?
dweller Said:
😛 😛 😛 😛 …. and YOU are suggesting that the christians, their churches, their orgs, their replacement theology, their 2000 year libeling, swindling, torturing and slaughtering of the witnesses to their fraud………
DONT HAVE AN AXE TO GRIND????????????????
LOL….. REALLY???????? 😛 😛 😛 😛
dweller Said:
Of course they did…. and rightly so….. after all the neigbors had common sense, were not liars, and did not have an “axe to grind”……. unlike the christians and their churches. Looks like the neighbors agreed with me and the dictionaries as opposed to you and the 2000 year liars and killers of Jews.
You are a pathetic joke, scrambling every which way for straws to grasp to support the mythology of your roger rabbit or your nitzri (as you say the name for your character can be roger rabbit, it does not matter. I prefer roger rabbit because it highlights the absurdity of your assertions).
@ bernard ross:
Not mimicry.
— Mockery. Richly warranted.
I don’t have heroes — ‘deceitful’ or otherwise.
But if I did have deceitful ones, I could always RELY on the fact that you would never be able to prove it
— inasmuch as you never go to the source for the evidence anyway. It seems you gravitate toward the Cliff Notes approach to life & Reality.
@ yamit82:
Sorry , but you cannot fake metaphysical brilliance; cannot be done. Scholarly writing can INDEED be faked. Not metaphysics. Sorry; no sale.
@ bernard ross:
That’s a crock of shit. I spent damned-near 90 minutes watching every frame of that pile of garbage. And it should INDEED be obvious that I did, since the ersatz religion of “Environmentalism” element behind it (and which I referenced in my post) does not become readily apparent till the final third of the presentation.
” Before I saw the movie I debunked the main argument you posted and after seeing the film saw that the same viewpoint was asserted there, the backdating, which makes sense.”
Does not make sense when you realize that Roman historians made clear mention of Nero’s persecution of Christ’s disciples in Rome. That’s not ‘backdating.’
Frankly, that wouldn’t be hard where somebody is already primed, as you clearly were, to BE convinced.
You don’t know that because you’ve never read them.
What’s TRULY absurd is that you could presume to hold forth in the matter when you don’t know for YOURSELF even what those sayings CONSIST of.
Right — ‘sensible & logical’ to anybody who doesn’t know the facts, and hasn’t done his homework.
Read the Gospel for yourself, and quit running from it, scaredy cat.
@ yamit82:
Wasn’t ADDRESSED to Jews, loksh.
It was addressed to Romans.
That’s why it’s called “Letter to the ROMANS.” [du-uh!]
If you wish to consider properly the action of a JEW, then you must consider the one who took a cat-o’-nine-tails to the money-changers in the Temple & kicked over their tables. “My Father’s house was to be a House of Prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves!”
The money-changing institution had become effectively a Sadduccean tax-collecting agency for Rome, and the incident directly threatened the economic basis of the imperium.
So much for “subjection to the governing authorities.”
@ bernard ross:
https://www.israpundit.org/archives/63602648/comment-page-12#comment-63356000148586
Thanks for the plug.
It was a good post; I stand by every syllable of it.
I’m afraid you’ll have to use it to refresh your OWN memory. You seem to need that.
— I rarely have access to sound or video, and this location is not one of them, so I can’t watch.
Not a very good performance by Bogart, however, as I recall. He wanted the role badly, but his work in it was uneven at best. All the stuff with the eyes (during the trial testimony) just produced a very stereotyped & mannered product — little more than a reworking of what he’d done a few years earlier in the Treasure of the Sierra Madre
— a much better piece of work (and a much better picture as well).
“Nobody puts one over on ole Fred C. Dobbs!”
Yeah, now I recall WHY the character reminded me of you. . . .
@ bernard ross:
yes. a Hebrew God and a Hebrew woman.
No. “In other words,” I don’t care what NAME you give Jesus. It has no bearing on who he was/is, or what he did, or said.
He is who he is, and nothing can change that. Even your frantic fantasies.
Yes, he’s coming back, but not for a ‘repeat performance.’
— He got it right the time he was here; there’s nothing to ‘repeat.’
But his work is yet to be completed; that‘s the reason for the return.
And no, I don’t ‘worship’ him. He would never allow it.
As a man, he’d be embarrassed by it.
As a Jew, he’d be scandalised by it
A fact that would’ve never occurred to a Roman
— and not to yourself either, apparently. (Not that that should come as a surprise.)
@ bernard ross:
A clone? How? — what makes you think they were alike? (let alone, ‘opposites’)
Every few years somebody comes down the pike with a new theory, and it always finds a dumb-assed following — for a while. . . . The last time was the Hugh Schonfield book, The Passover Plot; it was bullshit, just like the Atwill theory. The only reason you swallow this tripe is that you need to.
What i AM well-versed in is writing and in deciphering & assessing writing style — and I’m telling you, Atwill is fullovit. There’s no way that a gaggle of Roman hacks (or even Jewish ones) could concoct a character w/ the depth of the central figure in the Gospels. Jesus is no machine-produced item; he’s an original, and you can’t fake OR ‘obfuscate’ that. No way, no how.
If that is so, then suppose you show us a few examples of such ‘debunking’ over those “2000 years.” Can’t wait to see what you come up with.
@ yamit82:
Indeed. All the wrong ones.
Ditto.
@ bernard ross:
I don’t wear a mask.
The party unmasked is none other than yourself.
You deliberately clipped my words to make them imply something other than what I clearly intended.
— so I restored them, in boldface, and so-doing, unmasked you in the act of trying to slime me. You are a dishonest creep.
The Gospel is a Jewish source. It was written by Jews — a fact readily acknowledged by Jews.
You have no case.
@ bernard ross:
Whereby you show w/ vivid clarity that you are not animated by a sincere, open-minded (let alone, objective) pursuit of truth — but rather by sheer emotionalism. No way that your words can be taken for credible.
This line of discussion is the sheeerest drecklichkeit.
The use of analogy has absolutely no potential for making your case (or any other one).
Analogy has value only for ILLUSTRATIVE purposes, not PROBATIVE ones.
Once you have successfully made your case (something which you have YET to do in this matter), then you can go on to using an analogy to illustrate the point you have established — provided that you find a suitable analogy to that end (the nazi thing only shows you for the fool & buffoon you are).
But you have not yet proven your point. You have NOT yet shown that the persecution of the Jews is a direct (or even indirect) consequence of mass obedience to the teaching in the Gospel. So, trying to illustrate the point w/ lame analogies to the Nazis (or, for that matter, even w/ less stupid analogies) only derails your case. You’ll never make it that way.
The elephant in the room is your OWN — now acknowledged — phobia of reading for your own information the basic texts which you claim to be responsible for Jewish persecution.
The key to making your case is showing a correlation between the Gospel teachings and the persecution of the Jews. But to make that correlation, you’ll have to BEGIN by reading the document; there’s absolutely no way around that. Until you’ve read the Gospels, you’ll not even be in a POSITION to make the case.
I have read them, and I’m telling you — flat-out — that Jewish persecution is NOT an outgrowth of anybody’s adherence to the teaching in the Gospel. Quite the contrary, it is an outgrowth of the FAILURE to adhere to it; indeed the overwhelming and systematic failure to adhere to it.
@ bernard ross:
Not at all; just like YoursTruly said:
But then, I’ve read Jesus’ words for myself; so that makes me entitled to an opinion in the matter. . . .
Only a know-nothing bigot, and a most extraordinarily malicious one — on the order of the very ones you characterize here — would be capable of lumping together the perpetrators of oppression & persecution of ANYONE (let alone, the Jews) w/ the authors of the Gospel. If you read it for yourself you would know in an instant that they could not POSSIBLY be the same people. (And it is for precisely this reason that you dare NOT read it for yourself. You are TERRIFIED that it would destroy the house of cards on which your hatred is so meticulously constructed.)
Furthermore, only an ignoramous would be capable of finding the moral and metaphysical commentary of Jesus subject to systematic fabrication & fakery by ANYBODY (let alone, a gentile).
But the issue is not whether to believe that the Jews ‘hid the secret of Moshiach.’
The issue is whether the Jewish authorities suppressed the knowledge of the existence of Jesus, irrespective of his Messianic claims.
It would make no sense for them to suppress knowledge of haNitzri as Moshiach BECAUSE he was Moshiach — if they believed that’s who he was.
But they might well suppress the knowledge of Jesus, in ANY event, if he posed a potential for loss or major disruption of their privileges within the community. And those are only the self-serving aspect of it; that doesn’t even address the possibilities of intra-communal strife in the matter, and in the face of the Roman imperium.
What’s more, we know that the rabbis had already suppressed OTHER historical matters. The awareness of the Hasmonean Civil War following the Maccabean struggle, for example (and which led ultimately to Roman subjection), had clearly been suppressed by the rabbonim, and has been discussed here by others than just YoursTruly.
So the suppression relating to Jesus would hardly be a “one-off,” would hardly represent the first time that elements of Jewish history had been suppressed by the Jewish authorities.
I choose to believe what I know about human nature. EVERYBODY is subject to it, not just goyim.
Only to the simple-minded, and the simplistic — and to those who are easily buffaloed by hate-mongering demagogues like yourself.
The simple, obvious point that YOU hope everyone forgets is that you have YET to tell us what you mean by “Christian” sources, and “Jewish” sources
— when it is clear that — unlike yourself — the Jewish community has no problem accepting the fact that the NT was first committed to writing by late-1st century Judean & Anatolian Jews.
The Jewish intra-communal quarrel is not now, and has never been, over NT’s Jewish authorship but over the significance of that.
@ bernard ross:
Not when her antennae are drunk. Then they forget the facts.
The fact is that I’ve never called myself a ‘Christian’ on this site (or anywhere else). So my statement was correct, and hers is flat-out wrong.
And PresentCompany is (as is altogether typical for him) fullovit .
If you think otherwise, show me the actual post. Surely you should be able to find ONE among the thousands, if I said such a thing.
“Christian baptism” as defined by whom? Even the scripture itself refers to not one but TWO types of ‘baptisms’ — and NEITHER of them is called “christian” baptism therein.
As arbitrated & assessed by WHOM? — Mt 7:21-23
You cannot rely on a dictionary for such a definition. Dictionaries are notorious for having their own axes to grind in these matters (just as YOU quite obviously do), and it’s reflected not only in how they presume to define words, but also in the very words they choose to include.
The only legitimate definition of “Christian” is the one which THEY maintain for themselves .
That definition is the one which went into play when Xty first formalized itself as a separate & distinct religion — at Nicea in 325. The Nicene Creed clearly asserts that Jesus was ‘God’ — and to be a Christian, one would have to subscribe to it (and as well, to the subsequent creeds, e.g., the Athanasian Creed, etc).
If you don’t hold to the ‘divinity’ of Christ, then whatever else you may believe about him, you cannot be a Christian. That’s the touchstone; everything else is immaterial.
And on the Jewish side of the divide, the RAMBAN [Nachmanides] is equally clear in the matter. He states that the fundamental (and solitary) distinguishing factor between Judaism & Xty revolves about the question of Christ’s purported ‘divinity’ — and nothing else. A Jew can, e.g., believe — rightly or wrongly — in Christ’s messiahship, and REMAIN a Jew.
He CANNOT, however, believe in Christ’s ‘divinity‘ and remain so.
I’ve written of this before, numerous times, on this site — some of those posts addressed directly to you.
But like the other Jewish-insecure types around here, you read not for comprehension, but for support, validation & reinforcement. So you ignore what FAILS to reinforce — or what challenges the parameters of the box you live in.
At Antioch, yes. But not by themselves or among themselves. Only by their non-believing neighbors, who constantly overheard them referring to Christ-this, Christ-that & Christ-the other thing — so those neighbors simply assumed that these people must be . . . “Christians.”
They never used it for themselves, however, because Christ himself had never called them (or anybody else) ‘Christians.’ Those who loved him he called his friends . Nothing else. Among themselves, they referred to their belief as “The Way.”
But then, to our resident religious bigot & intellectual coward, a duck is a swan is a chicken is a vulture is a dodo is an eagle.
He just can’t tell one bird from another (let alone, from a man).
dweller Said:
That’s the line most stupid christian apologists use and now you too? 🙂
I suppose you never heard of Hellenist Jewish traitors who sided with Rome against their own people. Josephus was one of the more prominent and there was Philo many many others many quite scholarly and they could have and most probably did do what you claim no one could.
You read the bible like libruls read the NYT, Quite pathetic. You seem to be an intellectual cripple at best.
@ mar55:
Haven’t read it yet. Looks like he took dwellers invite seriously.
I think he should stay. Dweller is becoming less entertaining and we need a change or rest if you will. 😛
@ yamit82:
the film makes good common sense and appears to supply good support. The psychobbabbler’s rants about “brilliant sayings” is pure foolishness, hopey dreamy.
yamit82 Said:
depends on speed, and bundling of services. You can get basic services of phone plus internet starting about 40, but most get higher speed.
dweller Said:
rubbish, its obvious that you never saw the movie but went immediately to your debunking site. Before I saw the movie I debunked the main argument you posted and after seeing the film saw that the same viewpoint was asserted there, the backdating, which makes sense. Frankly, the assertions made were very convincing, much more logical than the popular myths. You appear to hang your hat on a bunch of sayings by persons unknown, which is absurd. The film is sensible and logical and your narratives are absurd.
@ bernard ross:
How expensive is internet service in the states plus minus?
honeybee Said:
Timothy??? 😉
mar55 Said:
perhaps the library is closed today for holiday 🙂
yamit82 Said:
I have always been leery of those passages.
@ yamit82:
yamit82 & Bernard Ross:
I just had the privilege to welcome Curios American. Still as obtuse as always. Telling us what to do and pontificating about what he does not know “Jack —-” about.
Have you noticed dweller is not around? Perhaps he decides to go to sleep to clear his scramble head a bit and give you guys a rest. It is curious that one disappears and about the same time another one re-appears.
Good night everyone.@ mar55:
I forgot, isn’t it curious that when dweller disappears another one appears? Is it coincidence? Hummmm!
@ yamit82:
yamit82 & Bernard Ross:
I just had the privilege to welcome Curios American. Still as obtuse as always. Telling us what to do and pontificating about what he does not know “Jack —-” about. Good night everyone.
@ bernard ross:
“Quite succinct” 🙂 like muddy psychobabble!! Holy Moly, he really believes his own ______ (Fill in the blank)
@ bernard ross:
Romans 13:1-2New International Version (NIV)
Submission to Governing Authorities 🙂
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
This ain’t no Jewish ethic or principle. Looks Roman to me.
Paul did claim to be a Roman!!!! Monty Python said so!! 🙂
@ bernard ross:
Is the Bible Historically Reliable?
@ bernard ross:
christianity =Syncretism
syn·cre·tism
noun: syncretism
1. the amalgamation or attempted amalgamation of different religions, cultures, or schools of thought.
.
bernard ross Said:
All three of them hiding out in the mountains of Utah!!
When the christians need the numbers they include some 2 and half billion people can’t all be wrong, when they are pushed about their behavior they disclaim almost the same number. 😛
@ bernard ross:
“Did Jesus Exist?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX4LvKvIWJw
yamit82 Said:
I enjoyed this interesting article… I was unfair to both chickens and dodos in my comparison 🙂
dweller Said:
baloney, inventions are often use existing information. There is nothing unusual about taking existing streams and revising and reinventing them even into their opposite,… and then backdating the revisions into the public knowledge. A few decades of time are easily obfuscated over 2000 years of mind control and revisionism.
Even brainwashed Jews discuss these fairy tales and mythological characters as if they actually existed. Apparently there are differences between earlier christian trends and those that followed. Read Belmans piece on historic Jesus. The romans could have taken the character of James and modeled from that a replacement composite character of Jesus, his opposite. Or any other character that anyone can think of. You should be able to comprehend this as you are well versed in obfuscation. No rocket science here.
dweller Said:
this is a ridiculous comment which is repeatedly debunked over 2000 years.
https://www.israpundit.org/archives/63602648/comment-page-12#comment-63356000148586
this long tome obsession with my comment on your habit reminds me once again of captain Queegs strawberries obsession.
Let me refresh your memory again lest you forget 😛
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlV3oQ3pLA0
dweller Said:
Actually talk of Jesus, the gospels, the NT bring up feelings of nausea in me, unlike you. Your affinity with these items is somewhat akin, TO ME NOT YOU, to a nazi extolling the virtues of AH love of babies and dogs and his building of the autobahn, etc., while avoiding the obvious, the elephant in the room: their bloodlust,their murder, their torture, their libel, their defamation, their destruction of Jewish bible and culture, their erection of a dogma to justify their despicable behavior….. to which do I refer? I am still looking for the difference between the two.
One of these two evils is still alive and still stalking the jews.
honeybee Said:
Yup, and more 😉
and on a lighter note:
dweller Said:
😛
dweller Said:
In other words:
you worship Roger Rabbit, your Jewish messiah born of a virgin birth resulting from a union of the Hebrew G_D and a woman, who died, was resurrected and is coming back for a repeat performance.
Now you are really pulling rabbits out of hats
however…
it makes as much sense as your alternative narrative of J. Pandera your nitzri.
Perhaps you can arrange for the roman rabbit church to revise the jewish bible over the next 2000 years, kill all the rabitt witnesses, burn their books, and claim that you are the real rabbits….
although it might be a lot less trouble to use the hindu bible as your false foundation.
😛dweller Said:
LOL, thats exactly what they did over the last 2000 years
yamit82 Said:
Like provocation !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
honeybee Said:
I have but I must admit that I have still retained some endearing childhood traits. So have you!!!! 😉
bernard ross Said:
dweller Said:
Yes, 2000 years and continuing at this very moment!!!!
So, you refer to the 2000 year serial chronic libeleing, swindling, torturing and slaughtering ……. the revisionism of the Jewish bible, the burning of the jewish books, the discrediting and defaming replacement theology…….
You refer to these as ” STRICTLY HEARSAY”
You have unmasked yourself but no surprise as you follow in the footsteps of your deceptive idol Paul, the acme of marketing. You morph from being a Jew, to a Jew for Jesus, to being a deceptive Pauline marketer who will take any deceptive path and tell himself he is “marketing”.
Sorry, I must reiterate, to your chagirn:
bernard ross Said:
dweller Said:
You appear to have become my parrot….mimicking and regrgitating my own words to you… they say that mimicry is a form of flattery but in your case I would say
HMMMM??? Now that yo mention it, your entire MO is as follows:
However, you follow in the footsteps of your deceitful hero who sought to deceive others by appearing to be like them. You called it “marketing”. Perhaps you “market” yourself here the same way.