Unironically the pharisees were traditional conservatives and jesus was a woke subversive trying to end their way of life. If they were anyone else but jews the /pol/tards on this board would be screaming "based"
>>18762128No Jesus was the conservative, they were the progressives
>>18762130This but (((they))) will deny it and instead invent another gender
>>18762128>traditional conservativesThat would be sadducees. They only accepted Torah, while pharisees also accepted Talmud (or, rather, Oral Torah).
>>18762128Jesus was more conservative in some ways - like divorce. More progressive in other ways - like cleanliness rituals. There's no reason to try and map that onto a clean modern political paradigm.
>>18762179Progressive was the wrong word for the second line. 'Reformist' is probably better.
>>18762128The cross is the perfect centre line between religious conservatism (justice) and religious liberalism (mercy). But in world affairs, Christ was apolitical.
>>18762192>told his countrymen to obey foreign invaders and pay the taxes imposed on them>apolitical
>>18762198Christ resisted the foreign occupation with his life, dunno wym
>>18762201i don't know which bible you've been reading but he didn't resist shit
>>18762179>divorceIt wasn't really conservative. Conservative = old norm. Old norm allowed divorces and, for example, polygamy. New norm forbids them. On the other hand, I wouldn't call him a modernist either, since he just followed Essenes regarding this matter.
I thought the temple jews would be the conservatives
>>18762201>"no no no you must pay taxes like a meek little weakling, you dumbass cattle">resisting the foreign occupation with his life
>>18762203Why was he crucified? Political threat
>>18762178The sadducees were the ones who killed christ though
>>18762201He himself? No. His followers? Maybe. I suspect the zealots mentioned in Acts are the zealots who started the rebellion in 66. And the zealots from Acts were in James' congregation. James himself was moderate, but after his death (c. 62) the zealots radicalized.
>>18762213because he preached that god was going to destroy caesar and establish a new theocratic government in the next few years ie the kingdom of heaven
>>18762218Of course. First of all, the false prophets are to be killed, according to the Torah. And they did consider Jesus a false prophet. And, more importantly, the sadducees tried to keep the peace with Rome, and a cult leader going around calling himself the king and messiah of Jews isn't exactly a good thing in this regard. Because the messiah is someone who restores independent Israel and defeats its enemies.But it still has nothing to do with how conservative they were. The pharisees were less conservative, since they also followed the Oral Torah, while the sadducees only followed the Written Torah. At that time, the Written Torah was more or less the Old Testament, and the Oral Torah was more or less Talmud. It's simplified, but you get the idea.
>>18762227It's kind of funny they tried to keep it civil and down low but then revolted like 3 times during the next 80 years.
>>18762227The sadducees didn't believe in the old testament. They rejected the writings and prophets as not being fully authoritative which is why they rejected the messiah and the resurrection of the dead, unlike the pharisees. Also jesus believed in the oral torah of the pharisees, his disagreements with the pharisees were by the hypocrisy he perceived in them placing greater emphasis on the oral torah ritual practices than ethical precepts.>Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. Matthew 23:1-3
>>18762230>3 timesThe Temple War was started in 66 by the zealots. After the Temple destruction, effectively no sadducees remained. The Kitos War (115-117) and Bar Kokhba (132-136) revolt didn't have anything to do with the remaining sadducees or their descendants (if there were any), afaik.
>>18762220That's not "resisting" you absolute knuckle-dragging numbnut.
>>18762130The man saying to accept prostitutes and empower the poor was conservative
>>18762234You assume that the Gospel is true. But I am talking about the secular point of view. Also, Oral Torah at the time included Mishnah. If Jesus believed in Oral Torah, why doesn't Christianity have anything like Mishnah?
>>18762243Paul convinced Peter and the others that the torah was abrogated with the new covenant. Up until then Christians continued to follow the torah, written and oral.
>>18762128Jesus was a Pharisee too. Pharisees argued with each other constantly. Jesus was not unique in this regard.
>>18762243>>18762246And just to take Paul's side here, prior to the Last Supper/Crucifixion/Resurrection, the new covenant would not have been established. So at that time Jesus would have been bound by the Oral Torah. But afterwards his followers were not.
I dont remember the verses he quoted but Tom Holland said that the Talmud says that the historical Jesus was a failed student who got expelled by his rabbi due to sexual misconduct or something like that and that out of resentment he began worshipping a brick? that he was the son of a prostitute and that he is in hell in a bath of boiling semen. That makes the whole judeo-christian values thing really funny.
>>18762246Jewish Christians, yes. Gentile Christians never did, at least most of them.>>18762248He was a para-Essene. He used to be in John the Baptist's sect, his views on marriage and divorce are Essenic and not Phariseic, he literally quotes the Qumran scrolls ("poor in spirit" and "children of light"). But he wasn't a proper Essene. He became more apocalyptic, and did alter certain things, like the Sabbath observance.
>>18762252>son of a prostituteJesus was a rape child.At the end of 5 BC or in the beginning of 4 BC, Joseph betrothed Mary. According to Jewish law, betrothal lasted one year. During this time, the husband was to prepare his house for his wife. In Galilee, they also had a custom that the betrothed couple could not have sex. So, the betrothed woman was kept inside her father's house.In the spring of 4 BC, Herod the Great died. The Jews rebelled, and Rome sent troops from Syria, accompanied by their Nabataean Arab allies. They destroyed Sepphoris (a major city in Galilee) and enslaved the survivors, then went south to Judea. Somewhere during the attack on Sepphoris, Mary (who lived in Nazareth, a town only 5km away from Sepphoris) was raped. Maybe she was raped by a Roman soldier. Or maybe by a Nabataean. Josephus emphasizes that the Nabataeans attacked and raped civilians a lot, even those loyal to Rome. At some point, the Romans even had to pull them away.Regardless, by the autumn of 4 BC, the rebellion was crushed. Mary had a baby from a rapist in her belly. Joseph could divorce her, but unless she was guilty, he would have to pay the settlement (200 zuz, which was a big sum that would cover expenses for one person for a year). This sum is enormous for a simple worker (especially right after the war), and getting raped wouldn't make Mary guilty. Infidelity would, maybe Joseph even tried to search for evidence. But he found nothing. So, he had to marry her and accept the child as his. In the early 3 BC, the little Yeshua bar Yosef was born.
>>18762252He wasn't a failed student but he made a comment about an innkeeper's wife while at Yeshiva, which made his rabbi extremely angry and caused him to be kicked out. The rabbi intended to allow Jesus to join back after he apologized a number of times, but the last time Jesus came to apologize, his Rabbi was in the middle of prayer and gave him a hand signal to wait until he was finished and intended to forgive him, but Jesus interpreted the signal as a rejection, and thus left angrily and began his ministry against the pharisees. Mary was not a prostitute, but he was born out of illicit relations that she had with a Roman soldier, that is why the virgin birth is absent from Mark, the earliest gospel. The reason a father figure named Joseph was created later was to fulfill prophecy in the oral torah of the Messiah ben Joseph. That's why the infancy narratives in Matthew and Luke completely contradict each other. Onkelos used necromancy to raise the three greatest enemies of the Jews, Emperor Titus, the Prophet Balaam, and Jesus of Nazareth to ask whether he should convert to judaism. Titus and Balaam told him not to convert because of all the power that would come to him by being an antisemite and how successful they had been in their lives. Jesus out of all three encourages Onkelos to side with the jewish people. His punishment of boiling in excrement is the punishment given in the afterlife for mocking the sages. Also it has been interpreted that his teaching of the eucharist and christian regarding bread as his body has caused him to suffer the punishment of bread as it passes through digestion.
No one really cares about the historical Jesus. They just accept the mythological, imaginary friend version. The truth is that Jesus was a jewish radical who upset the established order (both Jews & Romans) and got btfo. He was more of a Melchizedek priest rather than the warrior messiah the Jews were holding out for. Jesus sacrificing himself all according to keikaku was just a later retcon to save face that the messiah died like a common criminal.
>>18762130>>18762179>Everyone can be gods chosen people o algo, even Tyrone :)Jesus would be considered a woke universalist shitlib
>>18762292>24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”>25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.>26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”Matthew 15:24-26
>>18762128>Unironically the pharisees were traditional conservatives and jesus was a woke subversive trying to end their way of life.Christianity is an ironic cult religion
>>18762262>>18762268So this notion about the Roman soldier and the rape story which is supposed to have caused the birth of Jesus came from Josephus? I read that Josephus mixes reality with some mythological elements, personally i have no interest in that narrative being true or false, but trying to reconstruct a historical person that lived thousands of years ago will always end with some unreliable narratives, some people dont even believe that jesus existed, that he was mythological, as presumably moses also is, so i wouldnt be inclined to believe any narrative about the historical jesus because his life would have more likely than not poorly documented.
>>18762216he was a threat to the jews not to the romanspilate sees him as innocent
>>18762320It comes from the historical fact that jesus didn't have a dad
>>18762328And that threat was?
>>18762334
>>18762341If he was not a threat to the Romans, why does it say the Romans will take away their temple and their nation if he continues to go on like this?
>>18762354>if russia invaded the us and some american celeb started preaching render unto putin he'd be a threat to the kremlin not to the white house
>>18762357Rome is not invading Judea at this point, it's already a Roman province. In your hypothetical the kremlin is executing the american celeb for claiming to be president of the US not for his stance on paying taxes to russia.
>>18762364the kremlin is executing the celeb because the white house chimped out and demanded the kremlin to execute him so kremlin in order to pacify the white house obliged then the kremlin destroyed the white house 40 years later because they weren't rendering unto putin as the celeb preached
>>18762371So sounds like he was a threat to the Roman government then
>>18762383the threat was that white house full of pharisees who were in bed with the zealots who were actually rebelling against the empire and killing romans not the celeb shilling for the roman government
>>18762128>Please care about internal kikel squabbling
>>18762387At no point was Jesus "shilling" for the Roman government. His ministry was preaching the sovereignty of the Kingdom of God which would be a complete annihilation of Rome and all earthly governments.>20 Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”[c]>22 Then he said to his disciples, “The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. 23 People will tell you, ‘There he is!’ or ‘Here he is!’ Do not go running off after them. 24 For the Son of Man in his day[d] will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other. 25 But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.>26 “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.>28 “It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.>30 “It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31 On that day no one who is on the housetop, with possessions inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32 Remember Lot’s wife! 33 Whoever tries to keep their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35 Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.” [36] [e]
>>18762320>So this notion about the Roman soldier and the rape story which is supposed to have caused the birth of Jesus came from Josephus?No, he wrote about the 4BC revolt. The Pandera story is from Talmud + the Tiberius Panthera's tombstone gave this story some support. But the rape hypothesis isn't based just on that. All accounts (Christian, Jewis, Mandaean, Celsus') agree there was something amiss with Mary getting pregnant. Joseph suspected the child isn't his. But the thing is, he could've divorced her without any problems if it was indeed infidelity. Moreover, he was expected to do so as a Jewish man in the end of the 1st century BC. But he didn't. Why? Maybe he couldn't? Why? Well, if Mary was raped, it explains everything we read in the sources. But the rapist's name wasn't necessarily Panthera. It was a popular name among soldiers, so saying "Roman soldier named Panthera" was like "American soldier named John" or "Russian soldier named Ivan". In addition, "Panthera" sounds similar to "Parthena", and Jews like such wordplays in Torah.>I read that Josephus mixes reality with some mythological elements,I wouldn't say so. He, for example, claims Hyksos were actually Jews. And currently the expulsion of Hyksos from Egypt seems to be the best historical prototype for the Exodus.>unreliable narrativesAlas, it's true. But sometimes new findings are made...>jesus existed, that he was mythological...for example, the Ossuary of James. While not a solid proof, it seems that Jesus of Nazareth existed.
>>18762406nobody cares about that delusional shit as long as you're giving your shekels to caesar and being a good ivdean
>>18762412The render unto Caesar quote was not a statement of support for Roman taxation. You're forgetting the second part of the quote. It was a clever response to somebody trying to get him to admit to sedition in public while proclaiming his kingship over the jews.
>>18762433that's plausible deniability telling his followers to obey the government and pay taxes does nothing but benefit the romans
>>18762441I don't disagree, but that was a purposeful statement made to avoid crucifixion. The romans didn't crucify him for supporting taxes, it was his overall claim of kingship.
>>18762453Also the implicit threat of yet another bloody Judean revolt
>>18762128Shut up Jew. Go eat your foreskins instead of kvetching here
>>18762453>>18762456yeah his claim bothered the pharisees not the romans he wasn't rebelling against the empire at all
>>18762465It actually bothered the sadducees. The pharisees all believed in the coming of the messiah. Their top rabbis believed that Bar Kokhba was the messiah not long after.
>>18762476no the sadducees cooperated with romethe pharisees believed in a warrior messiah who would led them to victory against the romans but jesus preached submission to thembar kokhba was also a whole century later
>>18762534>no the sadducees cooperated with romeyou're arguing my point>he pharisees believed in a warrior messiah who would led them to victory against the romansyes>jesus preached submission to themNo. You fundamentally misunderstood the gospels. You should go back and reread them.
To add to that, Christianity was largely an urban movement imposed on a countryside that didn't want it
>>18762588yes lets reread the gospels, this one in particular >>18762341. if anyone had motive to want jesus dead it was the pharisees and the zealots who wanted to fight romelets also reread the pauline epistles >>18762412. pilate declares jesus innocent 3 times and washes his hands because no matter how you frame it jesus wasn't a threat to the romans since he taught submission to the governing powers
>>18762618nta. You seem not to understand what the messiah meant for Jews of the Second Temple. The messiah is a spiritual, political, and military leader who would free Israel and create the biblical theocracy. It also had an apocalyptic undertone. So, even if Jesus himself didn't seek the conflict with Romans, the mere presense of someone claiming to be messiah would destabilise the province a lot.
>>18762241>empower the poorhe healed the poor, made them spiritually self sufficient and asked them to cast aside money.that's not "granting" anyone power, that is asking them to be indifferent to other peoples power, and imploring them to start building their own power from scratch.giving the other cheek to those already in posession of parasitic power, in order to increase the productive power in the world.death to the world serpent.
>>18762713messiah claimants were a dime a dozen back then, what actually destabilized the province was judas of galilee founding the zealots specifically to oppose the roman tax census imposed by quirinius, and that was nearly 3 decades before jesus was crucified
>>18762141There is only one gender called "Christ Jesus". Anyone who advocates for two or more bathrooms is the antichrist.
>>18762128Jews who won't kneel in Christ, recognizing the body of Christ as the one true living God, should be publicly executed for treason against God. Its exactly what they deserve, and if you let them live they'll only claim that means they're right.
>>18762771Well this is newRespect for Caesar'Til now this has been noticeably lackingWho is this Jesus?Why is he different?You Jews choose Messiahs by the sackful
>>18762778How do you "kneel in Christ"?
>>18762771>messiah claimants were a dime a dozen back thenMost of them were also crucified
>>18762791If you're having trouble understanding, the body of Christ should seize you and hold you beneath the water until you see the light and either accept your God or refuse unto death.
>>18762798Baptism.
>>18762776Jesus lived as a MAN so clearly there is gender :-)The word comes from genus, Latin which means to give birth. In short, if you were not born with the ability to give birth YWNBAW
>>18762795only one of them is known to have been judged innocent by a roman governor tho
>>18762816That was in his pre-resurrected body. He became trans after the resurrection.
>>18762822Not in the New Testament so it did not happen. You need to do a wormwood cleanse by the way
>>18762819>known to be judged innocent>crucifiedI don't know why you would take the Gospel account of Pilate seriously
>>18762819
>>18762827>>18762835no one denies that jesus was crucified we're debating who really wanted him crucified
>>18762846the sadducees, aka the ones who conducted the trial, it's in the gospels
>>18762128>Unironically the pharisees were traditional conservatives and jesus was a woke subversive trying to end their way of life.You're rigth about Pharisees being traditional and strict, but Christ mostly agreed with them. It was Paul and later Paulitian Christianity who made later added passages like Matthew 23.
>>18762849the sadducees were the aristocracy who managed the temple and the sanhedrin but the gospels say the pharisees were the ones who pushed for jesus' trial and execution it's literally in >>18762341
>>18762846Yeah and I don't know why you would take the Gospels saying "Pilate didn't want to do it bro it was the nefarious Jews" at face value.
>>18762856The Gospel of John is not historical evidencem, it was written close to a century after Jesus left this world and it was written a propaganda piece for one specific doctrine.
>>18762856They are actually not plotting to kill him in the verses you posted. The following verse says that Caiaphas created the plot to kill him.
>>18762859>>18762863see >>18762201>>18762870after pressured by the pharisees
>>18762859I don't understand why Christians glaze Pilate so much. The man held nothing but contempt towards Jews.>Writing in his work Embassy to Gaius, Philo of Alexandria delivers a scathing review, describing Pilate as "inflexible, stubborn, and cruel." He details an incident where Pilate hung gold shields honoring the Emperor inside Herod's Palace in Jerusalem, intentionally provoking a massive local backlash.>Josephus chronicles multiple political crises under Pilate's administration in Antiquities of the Jews. In one instance, Pilate secretly routed Roman army standards bearing images of Caesar into Jerusalem under the cover of night, triggering massive Jewish protests. In another, he raided the sacred Temple treasury to pay for an aqueduct, later ordering disguised soldiers to beat down the citizens who rioted in protest.>In 36 AD, a large group of Samaritans gathered at Mount Gerizim, following a religious leader who promised to unearth sacred vessels hidden by Moses. Fearing a brewing nationalist rebellion, Pilate dispatched heavily armed cavalry and infantry, slaughtering many of the participants.
>>18762128Anyone who id trying to end the way of life of conservative Jews is a good guy in my book.
>>18762900Jesus was half Roman
>>18762888If you think Jesus was in fact resisting Rome I don't know why you think Pilate thought he was innocent.>>18762900This is the thing, every non-Biblical account of Pilate sounds nothing like how the Bible describes him, the idea he would have some extended dialogue about kingship with some random Jewish convict as seen in John is obviously nonsense.
>>18762910He was fully Roman. Jewishness was still patrilineal in the 1st century.
>>18762888>after pressured by the pharisees49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation,
>>18762910haha, good one. Still, he was adopted by Joseph and was a man of Jewish culture. And, I suppose, he honestly believed he was the chosen one.The INRI tablet looked like he was mocking Jews and Jesus in particular
>>18762922>He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation,So technically God was the one who created the plot to crucify Jesus
>>18762929Pilate was mocking Jews and Jesus
>>18762911>If you think Jesus was in fact resisting Rome I don't know why you think Pilate thought he was innocenti don't that's another anon's post but it's the topic we're actually discussing in the bible jesus doesn't resist roman occupation at all, he preaches submission to rome>>18762922are you saying his prophecy was already a plot to kill jesus?
>>18762935No I posted literally the verse where he announces that Jesus has to die
>>18762932This kind of pilpul does not work against ChristiansJesus Himself says >woe to the one who betrays the Son of ManAlso>may His Blood be on us and our childrenAlso the Fig Tree parable which refers to the nation of IsraelThis does not mean all talmudic jews are automatically damned though, only tjose who go against the spirit of Christianity will end up in flames regardless of religion. That being said, since talmudic judaism is anti-Christian in spirit, it is not a good way to live for a God fearing man.
>>18762935>he preaches submission to romeName 1 verse. Render unto caesar was already debunked earlier.
>>18762985So muslims are saved then because they believe in Jesus?
>>18762993They are "more saved" than talmudic jews, yes. Meaning they are much closer to the Truth but still heretical and therefore not part of the Saved Nation.
>>18762983why didn't he kill him sooner then?>>18762988>Render unto caesar was already debunked earlier.>>18762453>I don't disagreedoesn't look debunked to mealso i realize you want to overlook romans 13:1-7 and 1 peter 2:13-17 under the pretext that it's not jesus's words but it's christian doctrine nevertheless
>>18763011But Jesus himself told Onkelos that the talmudic jews were right
>>18763055No Christians cares for what Jesus said, Paul overwrote everything.
>>18763054>why didn't he kill him sooner then?It's literally the verse after the one you posted
>>18763059the verse says he prophesied that jesus had to die and i asked if that meant he was already plotting to kill him but you said nowhen did the plot begin?
>>18763061After he announced that they should kill christ to the sanhedrin
>>18763063so after the pharisees pushed him
>>18763063>>18763068just to be clear that we're not talking about john's gospel exclusively Mark 3:6At this, the Pharisees went out and began plotting with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.Matthew 12:14But the Pharisees went out and plotted how they might kill Jesus.Luke 6:11But the scribes and Pharisees were filled with rage and began to discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus.
>>18763068He pushed them to kill Jesus actually.>>18763105>Mark 3:6>Matthew 12:14>Luke 6:11All these verses describe the Pharisees rage at him for violating the sabbath, which was just a straight up crime he committed and then claimed just didn't apply to him. But Jesus never gets executed for violating the Sabbath. He gets crucified for claiming to be King of the Jews.
>>18762411>In addition, "Panthera" sounds similar to "Parthena"
>>18763132>He gets crucified for claiming to be King of the Jews.The reason change from gospel to gospel.
>>18763139Crucifixion as a punishment was exclusively reserved for crimes against the Roman government like sedition and treason.
>>18762130He was wanting people to troon out for god .
>>18763132but it shows they wanted him dead before caiaphas said anythinganother instance is Matthew 23: >Jesus roasting the scribes and Pharisees with the seven woesthree chapters later: >"Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him."but people keep saying it was the sadducees for some reason
>>18763144>Crucifixion as a punishment was exclusively reserved for crimes against the Roman government like sedition and treason.No, and that your argument is a straight lie is a terrible sight for your religion.Crucifixion as a punishment was relativelly common for no citizen and standard in regions in risk of revolting.
>>18762934Based
>>18762934Yes, he was
>>18763150>Crucifixion as a punishment was relativelly common for no citizen and standard in regions in risk of revolting.Right, so revolting implies sedition or other action against the government, not violations of the sabbath.
>>18763148I mean yeah jesus generally comes off as a really angry and unpleasant guy in the gospels and that made a lot of people angry. It doesn't change the fact that Caiaphas was the one who chose to prosecute him and put him to death.
>>18763185after those people reached him yeah
>>18763215Yeah the sadducees
>>18763227yeah i forgot about the seven woes of the sadducees my bad he really pissed them off with that one
>>18763185Think about it another way. Pilate wouldn't hesitate to kill Jews en masse if he suspected a rebellion. And he had all the reasons to suspect it, looking at the people claiming they'd found the messiah. Caiaphas convincing him to only kill one man may be viewed as a saviour.
>>18763227>>18763231the last woe is specially damning"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!"i bet the sadducees are still angry
>>18763172Dude, no one is saying Jesus revolted, by Judea was on the edge of a revolt.Why? Because of Judas the Zealot
>>18763248Yeah but his grievances against the pharisees were not the reason he was killed. Jesus himself fully agreed with everything that the pharisees taught, despite his accusations of hypocrisy.
>>18763276it's because their father was the devil who was a murderer from the beginning as he says in john 8
>>18763055That story includes necromancy, which is a forbidden practice. What this signals to the reader is that it does not belong to the realm of law, binding truth, or historical fact.I encourage you to ignore this Aggadah. The stroy is unreasonable, and should be dismissed.
>>18763313How does it signal that exactly?
>>18763304Jesus's father was a pagan idol worshipper
>>18763055The talmud was written in 400 AD.Quote your passage if you have a question about it. Don't embarrass yourself publicly
>>18762411>I wouldn't say so. He, for example, claims Hyksos were actually Jews. And currently the expulsion of Hyksos from Egypt seems to be the best historical prototype for the Exodus.He also claimed Manetho was lying about the Hyksos being oppressors since it clearly contradicted the narrative of Jews being escaped slaves. Unfortunately for him, archeology has shown the Hyksos were foreign invaders just like Manetho said, there's even a Hyksos pharaoh named Yakub (not to be confused with the creator of the white race) whose likely the historical basis for Jacob.
>>18763347>there's even a Hyksos pharaoh>41 So Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I hereby put you in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” 42 Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his finger and put it on Joseph’s finger. He dressed him in robes of fine linen and put a gold chain around his neck. 43 He had him ride in a chariot as his second-in-command,[b] and people shouted before him, “Make way[c]!” Thus he put him in charge of the whole land of Egypt.Genesis 41:41-43
>>18763355And history confirm this never happened.
>>18763336>Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy. Onkelos said to him: Who is most important in that world where you are now? Jesus said to him: The Jewish people. Onkelos asked him: Should I then attach myself to them in this world? Jesus said to him: Their welfare you shall seek, their misfortune you shall not seek, for anyone who touches them is regarded as if he were touching the apple of his eye (see Zechariah 2:12).
>>18763356You just said there was a confirmed hyksos pharaoh
>>18762863you actually do not know this. and in fact, the gospel of luke aligns with john in some points, vs mark, that would suggest luke either met john or the gospel of john was much earlier than scholarship would admit. examples of this are the lazarus narrative, the foot washing, the servant, caiaphas, etc.
>>18763321>How does it signal that exactly?Shemot 3:6
>>18763362Mark is the closest we have from an original, Matthew and Luke are copies of Mark with content added from a few decadfes later, John is slop from much later.
>>18762128Trvke
>>18763366Post Shemot 3:6, no one, not even jews, memorized this stuff
>>18763326but not the devil
>>18763382Why would god choose the children of the devil to make a covenant with and be a light unto the nations?
>>18762198Why is Ronald dabbing?
>>18763394he didn't he made a covenant with the heirs of the promise to abraham (christians)
>>18763436>heirs of the promise to abraham>(christians)No, Christians don't even follow Moses's law
>>18762179 Jesus was against divorce was for a really woke reason, Jewish divorce laws favored men.
>>18763358>necromancyJesis did not need any coin shaving hooknose to raise Him. This low iq brain rot is not in any NT.
>>18762128Both communism and liberalism are genealogical descended from Christianity which makes their constant seethe about it funny af and their glorification of the extremely chuddy pagans downright hilarious.
>>18763360And he was not Joseph, because Joseph was not pharoah and the pharaoh was named Yakub. The Bible is distorted propaganda
>>18763367you, again, do not know any of this. the only reason mark even has a date is due to the presupposition that Jesus could not predicted the temple's destruction, therefore it would have to be later than 70 ad because it was added. even the most extreme critics put paul's epistles prior to that. you have an out of touch thought about this.
>>18763474>you, again, do not know any of this. the only reason mark even has a date is due to the presupposition that Jesus could not predicted the temple's destruction, therefore it would have to be later than 70 ad because it was added.If one ignore all the evidence, then one can pretend to be right.
>>18763441moses' law was fulfilled by christ
>>18763478Jesus said otherwise, but then Paul corrected Jesus mistake.
>>18762292by that measure so is Plato. if you want true rightism you have to go back to Heraclitus and Homer. leftism can exist independent of whatever anti-Christian fantasies you have because you hate your dad.
>>18763475>appeal to authority retardi gave you evidence for why John and early gospel authorship, through Paul, is valid. you have nothing to refute this other than Bart errorman and other "scholars" presupposing the dating.
>>18763494>i gave you evidence for why John and early gospel authorship, through Paul, is valid.No, you cried "it's real, you have no evidence" on a loop.But outright ignoring archeology or textual analysis is pretty standard for Christians today, at least in the US.
>>18763451Onkelos was a gentile
>>18763500lmao give the evidence you have. archeology has fortified luke and john by, in the last 100 years, finding the pools of bethesda and siloam. your textual analysis is on what i already said, presupposing Jesus could not predict the temple's destruction. you have no reason to doubt the validity of scripture.
>>18763465Yakub would have been his patronymic
>>18763508>you have no reason to doubt the validity of scripture.Repeating slogans like a mantra will not make them truth. Seeing Christ say one thing then some random dude unsay it all is enough for me.
>>18763488uhhh in matthew 5:17 jesus uses the greek word kataluo (to overthrow, demolish, or break) saying he did not come to wreck or invalidate god’s redemptive purpose in the scripturesin ephesians 2:15, paul uses katargeo, which means to render inactive, powerless, or set aside because its goal has been reached
>>18763514>uhhh in matthew 5:17 jesus uses the greek word kataluo (to overthrow, demolish, or break) saying he did not come to wreck or invalidate god’s redemptive purpose in the scripturesOnly in later scriptures, mind to tell us what word Jesus uses in the septuagent?
>>18763513you're a bot and/or have nothing to back any of your posts. respond to what i've said or back up anything you say, like "random dude unsaying".>>18763515>Jesus' words in the septuagintobvious troll.
>>18763521Repeating "it's true, it has been proven" for something that is kinda know to be false is cringe.
>>18763509No and besides, Joseph was never pharaoh but merely a chancellor. We have no evidence of a chancellor named Yosef
>>18763515>>18763521but this is an interesting point if he's a jewwhere are you implying jesus is in the lxx?
>>18763504Your pilpul is weak and inefficient. The talmud was written centuries after Christ, that's a fact
>>18762178The Sadducees were the money changers of the temple. They only accepted the temple tax in foreign currency with pagan idols printed on it. They themselves minted lower grade coins.
>>18762241>accepting prostitutes8 And the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in a vineyard, as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a besieged city.9 Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.10 Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.So deep was Zion in sin, that it was like Sodom. Mary Magdalene had her heart changed. Who of Sodom has had their heart changed? >empower the poor 7 For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry.8 Woe unto them that join house to house, that lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth!
>>18762128>>18762130>>18762141Jewsus was a dirty commie leftist. Both Romans and fellow Jews had enough of his retardation and pedophilia.
>>18762252Why are they consulting a necromancer?
>>18763774>The Sadducees were the money changers of the templeThe Sadducees ran the Temple. They were the priestly aristocracy. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that the Sadducees were the most conservative Jewish group before the Temple destruction.
>>18763915The necromancer converted to judaism and wrote one of the most important targums
