Did the Jews really kill Jesus?

[37818]

new Jews " would be Christians who rejected the Torah, which the essence of Judaism.

The Christian community in Acts continues the way Jesus himself had lived: truly Jewish, and at the same time, truly loyal towards Rome. Once we recognise this apologetic function in Acts we no longer need to worry about specific narrative details.

It can also clearly be seen that the author of Acts was a forthright and open apologist for Christianity.

Wow.

However, the ancient Israelites were not Jews.

Do you mean before the birth of Judah?

[mikewhitney]

Wow.

Do you mean before the birth of Judah?

See? She used the argument of many Jews expecting the Messiah so there was no actual Messiah. However, one stood out and is well remembered today, a king and priest named Jesus.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

David's installment of Solomon as king and successor? I'm not sure I've encountered this as the Jewish idea of the Messiah. Source?

For the term being used for an anointed king you could start here http://jewishencyclopedia.com/search...&commit=search

I'd also advise you to read your bible.

[DesertBerean]

For the term being used for an anointed king you could start here http://jewishencyclopedia.com/search...&commit=search

I'd also advise you to read your bible.

And it all seems almost irrelevant.

[mikewhitney]

And it all seems almost irrelevant.

Hypatia missed seeing the focus of the discussion.

[rogue06]

That is not the point at issue. Jewish messianism was appropriated by Christianity and adapted for its own specific theological purposes.

You appear to have forgotten I Kings 1.32-46. That is the original meaning and understanding of Messiah [anointed].

As a matter of interest how do you personally feel about Mormons, or some other group, coming into Christian communities and [as they do] attempting to proselytise? After all the Mormons have all the trappings of Christianity, not to mention a few of their own devising, I would suggest that you are perfectly justified in feeling a sense of outrage. Yet you appear surprised that Jews continue to feel aggrieved by Christian missionaries trying to do undermine the Jewish faith in a similar manner.

The point that you evade is that your source has a vested interest in proclaiming that Jesus is not the Messiah and cherry picks their data to support their contention rather than fairly examining the evidence.

[rogue06]

I'd also advise you to read your bible.

iron-e.jpg

Coming from someone who appears to get her information by skimming the Skeptics Annotated Bible

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]46344[/ATTACH]

Coming from someone who appears to get her information by skimming the Skeptics Annotated Bible

I extend the offer that I made to Christian3, to you.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

The point that you evade is that your source has a vested interest in proclaiming that Jesus is not the Messiah and cherry picks their data to support their contention rather than fairly examining the evidence.

evidence cherry picks their data to support their contentionvested interest

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I'm not sure how to respond to your fantasy world. You should not even study these texts after you have become so disoriented. Your perspective is very weird and seems to discount all sensibility. You have created a scenario in your head that does not match anything of reality.

As you appear either unable or unwilling to address the points I have raised, it is duly noted that you have perforce resorted to a glib and facile ad hominem.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

See? She used the argument of many Jews expecting the Messiah so there was no actual Messiah. However, one stood out and is well remembered today, a king and priest named Jesus.

He was not a King, that he was acclaimed as one by his followers is why the Romans executed him.

[rogue06]

evidence cherry picks their data to support their contentionvested interest

What a twit. Hiding behind faux outrage to avoid the fact that your cited source, which is dedicated to keeping Jews from converting, would be an unbiased source.

And Paul was speaking primarily to Greek speakers so it is hardly a shock that he would use a Greek translation.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Do you mean before the birth of Judah?

If you are referring to the personage we find in Genesis that character is mythical, rather like Gilgamesh, Siegfried, or Odysseus.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

What a twit. Hiding behind faux outrage to avoid the fact that your cited source, which is dedicated to keeping Jews from converting, would be an unbiased source.

Ad hominem duly noted.

I did not use either the word biased or the word unbiased.

And Paul was speaking primarily to Greek speakers so it is hardly a shock that he would use a Greek translation.

It is surprising for someone who boasted he was a Pharisee and whom [so we are told by the writer of Acts] studied with Gamaliel.

Now what is your view of the Book of Mormon being acclaimed as superseding the New Testament? You appear remarkably reluctant to address the point I made to you concerning your own religious texts.

[DesertBerean]

It is surprising for someone who boasted he was a Pharisee and whom [so we are told by the writer of Acts] studied with Gamaliel.

?????? They translated their scriptures into Greek.