RatdogWillie wrote on 12/25/13 at 20:22:34:Serowbot wrote on 12/25/13 at 17:12:50:RatdogWillie wrote on 12/25/13 at 17:00:45:Congratulations... you found something even more ridiculous...
Jesus was not a Jew...
...
I'm done with this...
Merry,.. whatever you believe...
...
Jesus was a resident of Galilee and thus a Galilean. He was not a resident of Judea and thus not Judean.
He was raised in the Galilean city of Nazareth which is 16 miles from the Sea of Galilee. Nazareth of today’s times is also known as Arab capital of Israel.
No one during Jesus time on Earth was referred to as a Jew. The people of Judea were called Pharisees. It wasn’t until the 18th century that the tern jew was coined. It was meant to be an abbreviation of the term Judean which refers to a resident of Judea. It first appeared in English translations of the bible. It had no more race or religious reference than does the word Texan. And Judea was certainly not the homeland of the present day occupiers of Palestine.
What is referred to as Judaism now days is the same as Pharisaism of Jesus’ time. Jesus once said, "Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites, Ye Serpents, Ye Generation of Vipers".
The religious texts followed by the Rabbis of today's version of Judaism is the Talmud (Hebrew for doctrine). The Talmud, which is the highest authority of Judaism. Jesus is hated in Judaism.
The Talmud teaches that Jesus was illegitimate, his mother was a wh...ore who conceived during menstruation. Jesus is referred to as a fool, a conjurer, a seducer and he was crucified, buried in hell and set up as an idol ever since by his Goyim followers.
Hello all, I hope you all enjoyed the Christmas holidays as much as I did.
This is becoming an interesting discussion, however I have found a number of historical inaccuracies which lead to greater, if not grosser mistakes.
I have quoted the above because it collects a number of these in a very short space. Nothing against the author as an individual.
The
first thing which springs to my attention is "Jesus was a resident of Galilee and thus a Galilean".
True, but only in part. People did not have lastnames in those days, not in the Middle East, not in Europe. It was a very recent social invention.
Before then, people would be called by their 1st name, then their father's name (including girls) and eventually by their "family name" only if aristocrats.
So Jesus would most probably be "Yehoshua ben Yussuf", no "ben Daud" (=David) because regardless of what the Gospels say Joseph was not an aristocrat else he would have been recorded as a landowner not as a carpenter.
Secondly, Jesus was born in Bethlehem, which is in Judea, then fled to Egypt, whence he returned no earlier than age 12. So he spoke Hebrew (or Aramaic) with a "Egyptian accent" (similarly to those children born... in California, but raised in Texas... if they move back to California at age 12, they will speak with a Texan accent, it is inevitable)
The family returned to Judea only when King Herod died, but Joseph preferred moving to Nazareth in Galilee when he learned the new King was worse than the old one.
Third, the word "Jew" appears in the Old Testament it refers to the sheperds and camel traders who would lead a nomadic life, and who would often be recruited by the Israelites as light mounted troops in war.
Read "Numbers", "Kings" and "Chronicles", it's in there.
As for this thesis:
"
No one during Jesus time on Earth was referred to as a Jew. The people of Judea were called Pharisees. It wasn’t until the 18th century that the tern jew was coined. It was meant to be an abbreviation of the term Judean which refers to a resident of Judea. It first appeared in English translations of the bible. It had no more race or religious reference than does the word Texan. And Judea was certainly not the homeland of the present day occupiers of Palestine"
it reeks of "Bible Believers' Newsletter 479
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/nl479.htmFourth, Pharisees and Sadducees were two social but especially religious classes, something akin to Methodists and Baptists today.
Scribes were like lawyers and notaries, they would be record keepers for the Temple, and were subject to very strict codes of conduct, just like rabbis and priests.
Here is a giveaway of the strict code of conduct:
The Parable of the Good Samaritan:A man is robbed and beaten half to Death by bandits and left bleeding to death by the roadside.
A Levite /Rabbi/Proiest walks by (depends on the translation you read) sees the man, walks around him and continues his journey.
A Scribe from the Temple walks by sees the man, walks around him and continues his journey.
A traveller a Samaritan, walks by, sees the man, loads him on his donkey and leads him to the nearest post-house to have him cured.
The generic Christian teaching is Rabbis and Scribes are bad, but the Samaritan was a good guy.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
In Jewish/Israelitic culture, blood is holy, but also contaminates those who touch it.
Touch another man's blood, you are contaminated and must go through endless cycles of purification which may require days of fasting and prayer and quite possibly the offering of a sacrifice.
The Priest had is offices to attend to, and couldn't afford to be contaminated and disattend his offices.
The Scribe was going to Jerusalem, hence to the Temple, and would have lost a full week of work (and wages) just to purify and look after his cleansing.
The Samaritan... was from the Kingdom of Israel (see the separation of Judea from Israel after the Death of King Rehoboam, son of Solomon)
The "Israelites of the North" (Capital city, Samaria) were merchants and "men of good will" but resented the integralistic approach of the Judeans (in whose city Jerusalem resided the Temple) and separated.
The Judeans referred to the Samaritans as "sinners", but it was very much a matter of religious intolerance.
Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan was a tale of reconciliation.
The Samaritan who saves the Judean.
Fifth, the Talmud is not the "Bible of the Jews" as the above comment leads to believe.
The religious book of the Jews is the Torah, which corresponds to our Pentateuch of the Old Testament.
The Talmud is a collection of other writings, including works by famous rabbis from the Middle Ages, and is the nearest thing to an "Opera Omnia" with texts which discuss the civil and criminal codes of law, medicine, cookery, and religious issues as well.
The Talmud cannot help but comment that Jesus was illegitimate because all three Sinoptic Gospels agree that Jesus was conceived outside of holy matrimony.
That Joseph married Mary was a matter of opportunity, to save his own face and his family's reputation, much more than young Mary's life (else, she should have been stoned)
"The Angel appeared to Joseph in his sleep"... very nice fairy tale, I as a Catholic believe it was a late addition.
So, yes, by those ancient standards you could say that, had it not been for Joseph's resolution...
...Jesus would officially have been an illegitimate child (often referred to as "b+st+rd")
Last, the Talmud teaches Jesus was crucified and buried in Hell ?
What is so odd about that ? The Catholic and Anglican Churches teach exactly the same thing !!!
Without boring you with yet more, just refer to this Wikipedia page on the "SYMBOLUM"; read the translation of the text from Latin into English.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creed_of_the_apostlesI promise you will be surprised !
AND a Happy New Year to you all !!!
Pages: 
