Can bible study groups be in error?

[The Irish Ram]

The coin in question:

. The inscription on the obverse reads Ti[berivs] Caesar Divi Avg[vsti] F[ilivs] Avgvstvs ("Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus")

 

[hobelim]

The coin in question:

. The inscription on the obverse reads Ti[berivs] Caesar Divi Avg[vsti] F[ilivs] Avgvstvs ("Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus")

See? Its the image of a man who claimed to be a god who ruled over Judea.

If they were challenged to render unto God the things of God they would give caesar nothing..

Caesar was not the God of Israel.

 

[irosie91]

Hi hobe. If Jesus was saying the opposite and Jews knew it, the Pharisees would have condemned Christ on it and would have run to the Romans screaming sedition. They were unable to trick Him with the question.
He meant exactly what He said. No interpretation necessary. Coins, taxes, gold aren't important. Give it to whomever wants or needs it, and concentrate on what Christ said about Heaven. Gold is so unimportant they pave the streets with it there. For enduring down here we live in mansions in Paradise. Jesus was making a distinction between what is valuable and what is not in our Father's eyes. Christ put things in perspective.

wrong again Ram------the Pharisees did not LIKE THE ROMANS. When Jesus was hiding from
the Romans he lived amongst the Pharisees. Jesus was a Pharisee. Do you have OTHER examples
of Jews TURNING JEWS into the Pharisees? Your catechism whore lied. The people prone to cooperate with the romans were THE SADDUCEES. Your catechism whore lied again

No, I am not. The Pharisees used the Romans to their advantage. They didn't have to like them. The question the Pharisees asked Christ was intentionally to get Him in trouble with Rome, not the Temple.
Christ never hid. Why would He? He was here on a mission. Christ was turned into Rome,(by a Jew), not to the Temple priests.
Christ was never a Pharisee. He taught in the Temple as a child, but was never well received as an adult. Jesus used the Pharisees as an example of how not to behave.
As for your smart remarks, they are uncalled for, and wrong again rosie. I had no catechism whore, since I have never been Catholic. And if I wasn't such a good Christian, I'd think maybe you're the whore.

your interpretation of the NT----which is far from trustworthy to begin with, is IDIOTIC.
Judas----according to the NT writing-----TOLD THE ROMANS WHERE JESUS WAS.
If he was a prominent well known person and NOT HIDING why would the romans
have trouble finding him? It was the TEMPLE PRIEST-----specifically CAIAPHAS-
a NOTORIOUS SADDUCEAN ROMAN SHILL ----who betrayed Jesus. Keep in mind---
the Pharisee influenced Sanhedrin REFUSED TO CONVICT HIM. The sophist excuse for
the non-conviction to which you have been exposed is-----the Sanhedrin had no POWER
to convict <<<<< bullshit. The Romans has no interest at all in what jew the jews
killed or convicted unless the "convict" was ONE OF THEIRS. You should learn some REAL
HISTORY. Some simple realities that seem to have escaped your notice------
There were two very important players who were in the pockets of the Romans----
what rome wanted THEY DID------Herod and Caiaphas. These people are not
considered "saints" in the annals of jewish history-------as is YOUR adolf
doppelganger SAINT PONTIUS PILATE. Know a people by their
HEROES. (an important point-----when thinking SANHEDRIN --think Pharisee-
When thinking "temple priests" at that time----think 'Roman appointed sadducean
shill). Btw-----just what were you told Pharisees were DOING?------If you tell me
that you did not believe as a kid that the "MONEY CHANGERS" in the temple
were Pharisee loan sharks-------you are lying. Keep in mind-----I attended sunday
school as a child------I know the drill

 

[irosie91]

The coin in question:

. The inscription on the obverse reads Ti[berivs] Caesar Divi Avg[vsti] F[ilivs] Avgvstvs ("Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus")

your suggestion that the picture and "saying" on the COIN was a big issue ----is silly

 

[hobelim]

Hi hobe. If Jesus was saying the opposite and Jews knew it, the Pharisees would have condemned Christ on it and would have run to the Romans screaming sedition. They were unable to trick Him with the question.
He meant exactly what He said. No interpretation necessary. Coins, taxes, gold aren't important. Give it to whomever wants or needs it, and concentrate on what Christ said about Heaven. Gold is so unimportant they pave the streets with it there. For enduring down here we live in mansions in Paradise. Jesus was making a distinction between what is valuable and what is not in our Father's eyes. Christ put things in perspective.

wrong again Ram------the Pharisees did not LIKE THE ROMANS. When Jesus was hiding from
the Romans he lived amongst the Pharisees. Jesus was a Pharisee. Do you have OTHER examples
of Jews TURNING JEWS into the Pharisees? Your catechism whore lied. The people prone to cooperate with the romans were THE SADDUCEES. Your catechism whore lied again

No, I am not. The Pharisees used the Romans to their advantage. They didn't have to like them. The question the Pharisees asked Christ was intentionally to get Him in trouble with Rome, not the Temple.
Christ never hid. Why would He? He was here on a mission. Christ was turned into Rome,(by a Jew), not to the Temple priests.
Christ was never a Pharisee. He taught in the Temple as a child, but was never well received as an adult. Jesus used the Pharisees as an example of how not to behave.
As for your smart remarks, they are uncalled for, and wrong again rosie. I had no catechism whore, since I have never been Catholic. And if I wasn't such a good Christian, I'd think maybe you're the whore.

your interpretation of the NT----which is far from trustworthy to begin with, is IDIOTIC.
Judas----according to the NT writing-----TOLD THE ROMANS WHERE JESUS WAS.
If he was a prominent well known person and NOT HIDING why would the romans
have trouble finding him? It was the TEMPLE PRIEST-----specifically CAIAPHAS-
a NOTORIOUS SADDUCEAN ROMAN SHILL ----who betrayed Jesus. Keep in mind---
the Pharisee influenced Sanhedrin REFUSED TO CONVICT HIM. The sophist excuse for
the non-conviction to which you have been exposed is-----the Sanhedrin had no POWER
to convict <<<<< bullshit. The Romans has no interest at all in what jew the jews
killed or convicted unless the "convict" was ONE OF THEIRS. You should learn some REAL
HISTORY. Some simple realities that seem to have escaped your notice------
There were two very important players who were in the pockets of the Romans----
what rome wanted THEY DID------Herod and Caiaphas. These people are not
considered "saints" in the annals of jewish history-------as is YOUR adolf
doppelganger SAINT PONTIUS PILATE. Know a people by their
HEROES. (an important point-----when thinking SANHEDRIN --think Pharisee-
When thinking "temple priests" at that time----think 'Roman appointed sadducean
shill). Btw-----just what were you told Pharisees were DOING?------If you tell me
that you did not believe as a kid that the "MONEY CHANGERS" in the temple
were Pharisee loan sharks-------you are lying. Keep in mind-----I attended sunday
school as a child------I know the drill

Ahh, reading the NT carefully seems to raise these types of questions..

Why did they need help from Judas finding Jesus when he wasn't hiding? Good question.


If Jesus was praying in silence alone to God at a distance and his disciples were sleeping in gethsemane, who heard what Jesus said to God and wrote it down? Was Jesus wearing a wire? did they bug his robe? Is that legal?

Why, in stark contrast to the other three gospels, was Judas the only one given bread during the last supper according to the gospel of John? "And as soon as Judas received the bread, Satan entered him." Is eating the bread a blessing or a curse? Is it all a sick joke?


Hmmm, maybe there is a good reason, or not? maybe they want the reader to notice and think? Maybe they left big holes in the stories by accident? Maybe they were covertly revealing mysteries? Maybe its all a crock of shit? Maybe the gospels are a strange brew of choice words, a recipe for insanity, a curse like a cruel sword sent through the heart of nations because God loved the heathen Jew hating world so much?

And I wonder....I wa wa wa wa wonder....Why. a why why why why why.....

 

[irosie91]

Hi hobe. If Jesus was saying the opposite and Jews knew it, the Pharisees would have condemned Christ on it and would have run to the Romans screaming sedition. They were unable to trick Him with the question.
He meant exactly what He said. No interpretation necessary. Coins, taxes, gold aren't important. Give it to whomever wants or needs it, and concentrate on what Christ said about Heaven. Gold is so unimportant they pave the streets with it there. For enduring down here we live in mansions in Paradise. Jesus was making a distinction between what is valuable and what is not in our Father's eyes. Christ put things in perspective.

wrong again Ram------the Pharisees did not LIKE THE ROMANS. When Jesus was hiding from
the Romans he lived amongst the Pharisees. Jesus was a Pharisee. Do you have OTHER examples
of Jews TURNING JEWS into the Pharisees? Your catechism whore lied. The people prone to cooperate with the romans were THE SADDUCEES. Your catechism whore lied again

No, I am not. The Pharisees used the Romans to their advantage. They didn't have to like them. The question the Pharisees asked Christ was intentionally to get Him in trouble with Rome, not the Temple.
Christ never hid. Why would He? He was here on a mission. Christ was turned into Rome,(by a Jew), not to the Temple priests.
Christ was never a Pharisee. He taught in the Temple as a child, but was never well received as an adult. Jesus used the Pharisees as an example of how not to behave.
As for your smart remarks, they are uncalled for, and wrong again rosie. I had no catechism whore, since I have never been Catholic. And if I wasn't such a good Christian, I'd think maybe you're the whore.

your interpretation of the NT----which is far from trustworthy to begin with, is IDIOTIC.
Judas----according to the NT writing-----TOLD THE ROMANS WHERE JESUS WAS.
If he was a prominent well known person and NOT HIDING why would the romans
have trouble finding him? It was the TEMPLE PRIEST-----specifically CAIAPHAS-
a NOTORIOUS SADDUCEAN ROMAN SHILL ----who betrayed Jesus. Keep in mind---
the Pharisee influenced Sanhedrin REFUSED TO CONVICT HIM. The sophist excuse for
the non-conviction to which you have been exposed is-----the Sanhedrin had no POWER
to convict <<<<< bullshit. The Romans has no interest at all in what jew the jews
killed or convicted unless the "convict" was ONE OF THEIRS. You should learn some REAL
HISTORY. Some simple realities that seem to have escaped your notice------
There were two very important players who were in the pockets of the Romans----
what rome wanted THEY DID------Herod and Caiaphas. These people are not
considered "saints" in the annals of jewish history-------as is YOUR adolf
doppelganger SAINT PONTIUS PILATE. Know a people by their
HEROES. (an important point-----when thinking SANHEDRIN --think Pharisee-
When thinking "temple priests" at that time----think 'Roman appointed sadducean
shill). Btw-----just what were you told Pharisees were DOING?------If you tell me
that you did not believe as a kid that the "MONEY CHANGERS" in the temple
were Pharisee loan sharks-------you are lying. Keep in mind-----I attended sunday
school as a child------I know the drill

Ahh, reading the NT carefully seems to raise these types of questions..

Why did they need help from Judas finding Jesus when he wasn't hiding? Good question.


If Jesus was praying alone to God and his disciples were sleeping in gethsemane, who heard what Jesus said to God and wrote it down? Was Jesus wearing a wire? did they bug his robe?

Why, in stark contrast to the other three gospels, was Judas the only one given bread during the last supper according to the gospel of John? "And as soon as Judas received the bread, Satan entered him." Is eating the bread a blessing or a curse? Is it all a sick joke?


Hmmm, maybe there is a good reason? maybe they want the reader to notice and think? Maybe they they left big holes in the stories by accident? Maybe they were covertly revealing mysteries? Maybe its all a crock of shit? Maybe the gospels are a strange brew of choice words, a recipe for insanity, a curse like a cruel sword sent through the heart of nations because God loved the heathen Jew hating world so much?

And I wonder....I wa wa wa wa wonder....

your musings are silly. Try reading OTHER scriptural writings. ------The Odyssey is a scriptural writing. The Ramayana is a scriptural writing. OT is a scriptural writings-----Dat's how dey
wrote stuff in them there days. Sorta like historical fiction is still written------It's called POETIC
LICENSE. The Odyssey and the OT and NT and the RAMAYANA do have historical basis.
Judas existed Caiaphas existed. Pontius Pilate existed and ALL THE SCRIPTURAL writings
have -----HOLES Did you ever read the AGONY AND THE ECSTASY? do you think
Michelangelo was wearing a wire?

 

[hobelim]

Hi hobe. If Jesus was saying the opposite and Jews knew it, the Pharisees would have condemned Christ on it and would have run to the Romans screaming sedition. They were unable to trick Him with the question.
He meant exactly what He said. No interpretation necessary. Coins, taxes, gold aren't important. Give it to whomever wants or needs it, and concentrate on what Christ said about Heaven. Gold is so unimportant they pave the streets with it there. For enduring down here we live in mansions in Paradise. Jesus was making a distinction between what is valuable and what is not in our Father's eyes. Christ put things in perspective.

wrong again Ram------the Pharisees did not LIKE THE ROMANS. When Jesus was hiding from
the Romans he lived amongst the Pharisees. Jesus was a Pharisee. Do you have OTHER examples
of Jews TURNING JEWS into the Pharisees? Your catechism whore lied. The people prone to cooperate with the romans were THE SADDUCEES. Your catechism whore lied again

No, I am not. The Pharisees used the Romans to their advantage. They didn't have to like them. The question the Pharisees asked Christ was intentionally to get Him in trouble with Rome, not the Temple.
Christ never hid. Why would He? He was here on a mission. Christ was turned into Rome,(by a Jew), not to the Temple priests.
Christ was never a Pharisee. He taught in the Temple as a child, but was never well received as an adult. Jesus used the Pharisees as an example of how not to behave.
As for your smart remarks, they are uncalled for, and wrong again rosie. I had no catechism whore, since I have never been Catholic. And if I wasn't such a good Christian, I'd think maybe you're the whore.

your interpretation of the NT----which is far from trustworthy to begin with, is IDIOTIC.
Judas----according to the NT writing-----TOLD THE ROMANS WHERE JESUS WAS.
If he was a prominent well known person and NOT HIDING why would the romans
have trouble finding him? It was the TEMPLE PRIEST-----specifically CAIAPHAS-
a NOTORIOUS SADDUCEAN ROMAN SHILL ----who betrayed Jesus. Keep in mind---
the Pharisee influenced Sanhedrin REFUSED TO CONVICT HIM. The sophist excuse for
the non-conviction to which you have been exposed is-----the Sanhedrin had no POWER
to convict <<<<< bullshit. The Romans has no interest at all in what jew the jews
killed or convicted unless the "convict" was ONE OF THEIRS. You should learn some REAL
HISTORY. Some simple realities that seem to have escaped your notice------
There were two very important players who were in the pockets of the Romans----
what rome wanted THEY DID------Herod and Caiaphas. These people are not
considered "saints" in the annals of jewish history-------as is YOUR adolf
doppelganger SAINT PONTIUS PILATE. Know a people by their
HEROES. (an important point-----when thinking SANHEDRIN --think Pharisee-
When thinking "temple priests" at that time----think 'Roman appointed sadducean
shill). Btw-----just what were you told Pharisees were DOING?------If you tell me
that you did not believe as a kid that the "MONEY CHANGERS" in the temple
were Pharisee loan sharks-------you are lying. Keep in mind-----I attended sunday
school as a child------I know the drill

Ahh, reading the NT carefully seems to raise these types of questions..

Why did they need help from Judas finding Jesus when he wasn't hiding? Good question.


If Jesus was praying alone to God and his disciples were sleeping in gethsemane, who heard what Jesus said to God and wrote it down? Was Jesus wearing a wire? did they bug his robe?

Why, in stark contrast to the other three gospels, was Judas the only one given bread during the last supper according to the gospel of John? "And as soon as Judas received the bread, Satan entered him." Is eating the bread a blessing or a curse? Is it all a sick joke?


Hmmm, maybe there is a good reason? maybe they want the reader to notice and think? Maybe they they left big holes in the stories by accident? Maybe they were covertly revealing mysteries? Maybe its all a crock of shit? Maybe the gospels are a strange brew of choice words, a recipe for insanity, a curse like a cruel sword sent through the heart of nations because God loved the heathen Jew hating world so much?

And I wonder....I wa wa wa wa wonder....

your musings are silly. Try reading OTHER scriptural writings. ------The Odyssey is a scriptural writing. The Ramayana is a scriptural writing. OT is a scriptural writings-----Dat's how dey
wrote stuff in them there days. Sorta like historical fiction is still written------It's called POETIC
LICENSE. The Odyssey and the OT and NT and the RAMAYANA do have historical basis.
Judas existed Caiaphas existed. Pontius Pilate existed and ALL THE SCRIPTURAL writings
have -----HOLES Did you ever read the AGONY AND THE ECSTASY? do you think
Michelangelo was wearing a wire?

Damn Rosie.. nothing gets by you. Poetic license? Who woodda thunk. Could there be something more? Who can say? Take a harder look. If you find anything else, feed the pigeons.

 

[irosie91]

wrong again Ram------the Pharisees did not LIKE THE ROMANS. When Jesus was hiding from
the Romans he lived amongst the Pharisees. Jesus was a Pharisee. Do you have OTHER examples
of Jews TURNING JEWS into the Pharisees? Your catechism whore lied. The people prone to cooperate with the romans were THE SADDUCEES. Your catechism whore lied again

No, I am not. The Pharisees used the Romans to their advantage. They didn't have to like them. The question the Pharisees asked Christ was intentionally to get Him in trouble with Rome, not the Temple.
Christ never hid. Why would He? He was here on a mission. Christ was turned into Rome,(by a Jew), not to the Temple priests.
Christ was never a Pharisee. He taught in the Temple as a child, but was never well received as an adult. Jesus used the Pharisees as an example of how not to behave.
As for your smart remarks, they are uncalled for, and wrong again rosie. I had no catechism whore, since I have never been Catholic. And if I wasn't such a good Christian, I'd think maybe you're the whore.

your interpretation of the NT----which is far from trustworthy to begin with, is IDIOTIC.
Judas----according to the NT writing-----TOLD THE ROMANS WHERE JESUS WAS.
If he was a prominent well known person and NOT HIDING why would the romans
have trouble finding him? It was the TEMPLE PRIEST-----specifically CAIAPHAS-
a NOTORIOUS SADDUCEAN ROMAN SHILL ----who betrayed Jesus. Keep in mind---
the Pharisee influenced Sanhedrin REFUSED TO CONVICT HIM. The sophist excuse for
the non-conviction to which you have been exposed is-----the Sanhedrin had no POWER
to convict <<<<< bullshit. The Romans has no interest at all in what jew the jews
killed or convicted unless the "convict" was ONE OF THEIRS. You should learn some REAL
HISTORY. Some simple realities that seem to have escaped your notice------
There were two very important players who were in the pockets of the Romans----
what rome wanted THEY DID------Herod and Caiaphas. These people are not
considered "saints" in the annals of jewish history-------as is YOUR adolf
doppelganger SAINT PONTIUS PILATE. Know a people by their
HEROES. (an important point-----when thinking SANHEDRIN --think Pharisee-
When thinking "temple priests" at that time----think 'Roman appointed sadducean
shill). Btw-----just what were you told Pharisees were DOING?------If you tell me
that you did not believe as a kid that the "MONEY CHANGERS" in the temple
were Pharisee loan sharks-------you are lying. Keep in mind-----I attended sunday
school as a child------I know the drill

Ahh, reading the NT carefully seems to raise these types of questions..

Why did they need help from Judas finding Jesus when he wasn't hiding? Good question.


If Jesus was praying alone to God and his disciples were sleeping in gethsemane, who heard what Jesus said to God and wrote it down? Was Jesus wearing a wire? did they bug his robe?

Why, in stark contrast to the other three gospels, was Judas the only one given bread during the last supper according to the gospel of John? "And as soon as Judas received the bread, Satan entered him." Is eating the bread a blessing or a curse? Is it all a sick joke?


Hmmm, maybe there is a good reason? maybe they want the reader to notice and think? Maybe they they left big holes in the stories by accident? Maybe they were covertly revealing mysteries? Maybe its all a crock of shit? Maybe the gospels are a strange brew of choice words, a recipe for insanity, a curse like a cruel sword sent through the heart of nations because God loved the heathen Jew hating world so much?

And I wonder....I wa wa wa wa wonder....

your musings are silly. Try reading OTHER scriptural writings. ------The Odyssey is a scriptural writing. The Ramayana is a scriptural writing. OT is a scriptural writings-----Dat's how dey
wrote stuff in them there days. Sorta like historical fiction is still written------It's called POETIC
LICENSE. The Odyssey and the OT and NT and the RAMAYANA do have historical basis.
Judas existed Caiaphas existed. Pontius Pilate existed and ALL THE SCRIPTURAL writings
have -----HOLES Did you ever read the AGONY AND THE ECSTASY? do you think
Michelangelo was wearing a wire?

Damn Rosie.. nothing gets by you. Poetic license? Who woodda thunk. Could be something more? Who can say? Take a harder look. If you find anything, secretly feed the pigeons.

If this stuff ever gets out heads will roll, figuratively speaking of course.

oh-----you want MAGIC sorry------I do not do magic. If the writers of the NT wanted to
present some Roman as feeling guilty about crucifying some guy named "jesus"-----they should
have chosen someone with FAR LESS BLOOD ON HIS HANDS than was Pilate---who
HISTORICALLY crucified something like 10,000 jews (generally Pharisees) If the writers of the NT wanted to claim that DA PHARISEES "DID IT TO JESUS"------The should have chosen some person not SO HATED BY DA PHARISEES and who did not DESPISE THE PHARISEES----
as was true of Caiaphas. Remember---"if it does not make sense, it is probably not true"
The NT functions as an APOLOGY FOR CONSTANTINE---EMPEROR OF THE HOLEY
roman empire. It trivializes the atrocities of DA ROMANS and demonizes the Pharisees----
because the ROMANS HATED THE PHARISEES because the PHARISEES resisted the
filth of ROME

 

[hobelim]

No, I am not. The Pharisees used the Romans to their advantage. They didn't have to like them. The question the Pharisees asked Christ was intentionally to get Him in trouble with Rome, not the Temple.
Christ never hid. Why would He? He was here on a mission. Christ was turned into Rome,(by a Jew), not to the Temple priests.
Christ was never a Pharisee. He taught in the Temple as a child, but was never well received as an adult. Jesus used the Pharisees as an example of how not to behave.
As for your smart remarks, they are uncalled for, and wrong again rosie. I had no catechism whore, since I have never been Catholic. And if I wasn't such a good Christian, I'd think maybe you're the whore.

your interpretation of the NT----which is far from trustworthy to begin with, is IDIOTIC.
Judas----according to the NT writing-----TOLD THE ROMANS WHERE JESUS WAS.
If he was a prominent well known person and NOT HIDING why would the romans
have trouble finding him? It was the TEMPLE PRIEST-----specifically CAIAPHAS-
a NOTORIOUS SADDUCEAN ROMAN SHILL ----who betrayed Jesus. Keep in mind---
the Pharisee influenced Sanhedrin REFUSED TO CONVICT HIM. The sophist excuse for
the non-conviction to which you have been exposed is-----the Sanhedrin had no POWER
to convict <<<<< bullshit. The Romans has no interest at all in what jew the jews
killed or convicted unless the "convict" was ONE OF THEIRS. You should learn some REAL
HISTORY. Some simple realities that seem to have escaped your notice------
There were two very important players who were in the pockets of the Romans----
what rome wanted THEY DID------Herod and Caiaphas. These people are not
considered "saints" in the annals of jewish history-------as is YOUR adolf
doppelganger SAINT PONTIUS PILATE. Know a people by their
HEROES. (an important point-----when thinking SANHEDRIN --think Pharisee-
When thinking "temple priests" at that time----think 'Roman appointed sadducean
shill). Btw-----just what were you told Pharisees were DOING?------If you tell me
that you did not believe as a kid that the "MONEY CHANGERS" in the temple
were Pharisee loan sharks-------you are lying. Keep in mind-----I attended sunday
school as a child------I know the drill

Ahh, reading the NT carefully seems to raise these types of questions..

Why did they need help from Judas finding Jesus when he wasn't hiding? Good question.


If Jesus was praying alone to God and his disciples were sleeping in gethsemane, who heard what Jesus said to God and wrote it down? Was Jesus wearing a wire? did they bug his robe?

Why, in stark contrast to the other three gospels, was Judas the only one given bread during the last supper according to the gospel of John? "And as soon as Judas received the bread, Satan entered him." Is eating the bread a blessing or a curse? Is it all a sick joke?


Hmmm, maybe there is a good reason? maybe they want the reader to notice and think? Maybe they they left big holes in the stories by accident? Maybe they were covertly revealing mysteries? Maybe its all a crock of shit? Maybe the gospels are a strange brew of choice words, a recipe for insanity, a curse like a cruel sword sent through the heart of nations because God loved the heathen Jew hating world so much?

And I wonder....I wa wa wa wa wonder....

your musings are silly. Try reading OTHER scriptural writings. ------The Odyssey is a scriptural writing. The Ramayana is a scriptural writing. OT is a scriptural writings-----Dat's how dey
wrote stuff in them there days. Sorta like historical fiction is still written------It's called POETIC
LICENSE. The Odyssey and the OT and NT and the RAMAYANA do have historical basis.
Judas existed Caiaphas existed. Pontius Pilate existed and ALL THE SCRIPTURAL writings
have -----HOLES Did you ever read the AGONY AND THE ECSTASY? do you think
Michelangelo was wearing a wire?

Damn Rosie.. nothing gets by you. Poetic license? Who woodda thunk. Could be something more? Who can say? Take a harder look. If you find anything, secretly feed the pigeons.

If this stuff ever gets out heads will roll, figuratively speaking of course.

oh-----you want MAGIC sorry------I do not do magic. If the writers of the NT wanted to
present some Roman as feeling guilty about crucifying some guy named "jesus"-----they should
have chosen someone with FAR LESS BLOOD ON HIS HANDS than was Pilate---who
HISTORICALLY crucified something like 10,000 jews (generally Pharisees) If the writers of the NT wanted to claim that DA PHARISEES "DID IT TO JESUS"------The should have chosen some person not SO HATED BY DA PHARISEES and who did not DESPISE THE PHARISEES----
as was true of Caiaphas. Remember---"if it does not make sense, it is probably not true"
The NT functions as an APOLOGY FOR CONSTANTINE---EMPEROR OF THE HOLEY
roman empire. It trivializes the atrocities of DA ROMANS and demonizes the Pharisees----
because the ROMANS HATED THE PHARISEES because the PHARISEES resisted the
filth of ROME

and?

"I will force your oppressors to eat their own flesh and make them drunk on their own blood as if with new wine."

"I have not come to bring peace but a sword."

"Take from my hand this cup of fiery wine and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. When they have drunk it they will vomit and go mad; such is the sword that I am sending among them"

"From his mouth there went a sharp sword with which to smite the nations."

"Take this cup of wine and drink it, all of you. This is a cup of my blood, the blood of the covenant."

Just art thou, in these thy judgments, thou Holy One who art and wast; for they shed the blood of thy people and of thy prophets and thou hast given them blood to drink."

The sword is a curse under the appearance of a cup of wine.

"He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword."


You see?

To Jesus, his disciples, followers, and the authors of the gospels, the nations were the enemy.

 

[Taz]

your interpretation of the NT----which is far from trustworthy to begin with, is IDIOTIC.
Judas----according to the NT writing-----TOLD THE ROMANS WHERE JESUS WAS.
If he was a prominent well known person and NOT HIDING why would the romans
have trouble finding him? It was the TEMPLE PRIEST-----specifically CAIAPHAS-
a NOTORIOUS SADDUCEAN ROMAN SHILL ----who betrayed Jesus. Keep in mind---
the Pharisee influenced Sanhedrin REFUSED TO CONVICT HIM. The sophist excuse for
the non-conviction to which you have been exposed is-----the Sanhedrin had no POWER
to convict <<<<< bullshit. The Romans has no interest at all in what jew the jews
killed or convicted unless the "convict" was ONE OF THEIRS. You should learn some REAL
HISTORY. Some simple realities that seem to have escaped your notice------
There were two very important players who were in the pockets of the Romans----
what rome wanted THEY DID------Herod and Caiaphas. These people are not
considered "saints" in the annals of jewish history-------as is YOUR adolf
doppelganger SAINT PONTIUS PILATE. Know a people by their
HEROES. (an important point-----when thinking SANHEDRIN --think Pharisee-
When thinking "temple priests" at that time----think 'Roman appointed sadducean
shill). Btw-----just what were you told Pharisees were DOING?------If you tell me
that you did not believe as a kid that the "MONEY CHANGERS" in the temple
were Pharisee loan sharks-------you are lying. Keep in mind-----I attended sunday
school as a child------I know the drill

Ahh, reading the NT carefully seems to raise these types of questions..

Why did they need help from Judas finding Jesus when he wasn't hiding? Good question.


If Jesus was praying alone to God and his disciples were sleeping in gethsemane, who heard what Jesus said to God and wrote it down? Was Jesus wearing a wire? did they bug his robe?

Why, in stark contrast to the other three gospels, was Judas the only one given bread during the last supper according to the gospel of John? "And as soon as Judas received the bread, Satan entered him." Is eating the bread a blessing or a curse? Is it all a sick joke?


Hmmm, maybe there is a good reason? maybe they want the reader to notice and think? Maybe they they left big holes in the stories by accident? Maybe they were covertly revealing mysteries? Maybe its all a crock of shit? Maybe the gospels are a strange brew of choice words, a recipe for insanity, a curse like a cruel sword sent through the heart of nations because God loved the heathen Jew hating world so much?

And I wonder....I wa wa wa wa wonder....

your musings are silly. Try reading OTHER scriptural writings. ------The Odyssey is a scriptural writing. The Ramayana is a scriptural writing. OT is a scriptural writings-----Dat's how dey
wrote stuff in them there days. Sorta like historical fiction is still written------It's called POETIC
LICENSE. The Odyssey and the OT and NT and the RAMAYANA do have historical basis.
Judas existed Caiaphas existed. Pontius Pilate existed and ALL THE SCRIPTURAL writings
have -----HOLES Did you ever read the AGONY AND THE ECSTASY? do you think
Michelangelo was wearing a wire?

Damn Rosie.. nothing gets by you. Poetic license? Who woodda thunk. Could be something more? Who can say? Take a harder look. If you find anything, secretly feed the pigeons.

If this stuff ever gets out heads will roll, figuratively speaking of course.

oh-----you want MAGIC sorry------I do not do magic. If the writers of the NT wanted to
present some Roman as feeling guilty about crucifying some guy named "jesus"-----they should
have chosen someone with FAR LESS BLOOD ON HIS HANDS than was Pilate---who
HISTORICALLY crucified something like 10,000 jews (generally Pharisees) If the writers of the NT wanted to claim that DA PHARISEES "DID IT TO JESUS"------The should have chosen some person not SO HATED BY DA PHARISEES and who did not DESPISE THE PHARISEES----
as was true of Caiaphas. Remember---"if it does not make sense, it is probably not true"
The NT functions as an APOLOGY FOR CONSTANTINE---EMPEROR OF THE HOLEY
roman empire. It trivializes the atrocities of DA ROMANS and demonizes the Pharisees----
because the ROMANS HATED THE PHARISEES because the PHARISEES resisted the
filth of ROME

and?

"I will force your oppressors to eat their own flesh and make them drunk on their own blood as if with new wine."

"I have not come to bring peace but a sword."

"Take from my hand this cup of fiery wine and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. When they have drunk it they will vomit and go mad; such is the sword that I am sending among them"

"From his mouth there went a sharp sword with which to smite the nations."

"Take this cup of wine and drink it, all of you. This is a cup of my blood, the blood of the covenant."

Just art thou, in these thy judgments, thou Holy One who art and wast; for they shed the blood of thy people and of thy prophets and thou hast given them blood to drink."

The sword is a curse under the appearance of a cup of wine.

"He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword."


You see?

To Jesus, his disciples, followers, and the authors of the gospels, the nations were the enemy.

So the USA is your enemy?

 

[hobelim]

Ahh, reading the NT carefully seems to raise these types of questions..

Why did they need help from Judas finding Jesus when he wasn't hiding? Good question.


If Jesus was praying alone to God and his disciples were sleeping in gethsemane, who heard what Jesus said to God and wrote it down? Was Jesus wearing a wire? did they bug his robe?

Why, in stark contrast to the other three gospels, was Judas the only one given bread during the last supper according to the gospel of John? "And as soon as Judas received the bread, Satan entered him." Is eating the bread a blessing or a curse? Is it all a sick joke?


Hmmm, maybe there is a good reason? maybe they want the reader to notice and think? Maybe they they left big holes in the stories by accident? Maybe they were covertly revealing mysteries? Maybe its all a crock of shit? Maybe the gospels are a strange brew of choice words, a recipe for insanity, a curse like a cruel sword sent through the heart of nations because God loved the heathen Jew hating world so much?

And I wonder....I wa wa wa wa wonder....

your musings are silly. Try reading OTHER scriptural writings. ------The Odyssey is a scriptural writing. The Ramayana is a scriptural writing. OT is a scriptural writings-----Dat's how dey
wrote stuff in them there days. Sorta like historical fiction is still written------It's called POETIC
LICENSE. The Odyssey and the OT and NT and the RAMAYANA do have historical basis.
Judas existed Caiaphas existed. Pontius Pilate existed and ALL THE SCRIPTURAL writings
have -----HOLES Did you ever read the AGONY AND THE ECSTASY? do you think
Michelangelo was wearing a wire?

Damn Rosie.. nothing gets by you. Poetic license? Who woodda thunk. Could be something more? Who can say? Take a harder look. If you find anything, secretly feed the pigeons.

If this stuff ever gets out heads will roll, figuratively speaking of course.

oh-----you want MAGIC sorry------I do not do magic. If the writers of the NT wanted to
present some Roman as feeling guilty about crucifying some guy named "jesus"-----they should
have chosen someone with FAR LESS BLOOD ON HIS HANDS than was Pilate---who
HISTORICALLY crucified something like 10,000 jews (generally Pharisees) If the writers of the NT wanted to claim that DA PHARISEES "DID IT TO JESUS"------The should have chosen some person not SO HATED BY DA PHARISEES and who did not DESPISE THE PHARISEES----
as was true of Caiaphas. Remember---"if it does not make sense, it is probably not true"
The NT functions as an APOLOGY FOR CONSTANTINE---EMPEROR OF THE HOLEY
roman empire. It trivializes the atrocities of DA ROMANS and demonizes the Pharisees----
because the ROMANS HATED THE PHARISEES because the PHARISEES resisted the
filth of ROME

and?

"I will force your oppressors to eat their own flesh and make them drunk on their own blood as if with new wine."

"I have not come to bring peace but a sword."

"Take from my hand this cup of fiery wine and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. When they have drunk it they will vomit and go mad; such is the sword that I am sending among them"

"From his mouth there went a sharp sword with which to smite the nations."

"Take this cup of wine and drink it, all of you. This is a cup of my blood, the blood of the covenant."

Just art thou, in these thy judgments, thou Holy One who art and wast; for they shed the blood of thy people and of thy prophets and thou hast given them blood to drink."

The sword is a curse under the appearance of a cup of wine.

"He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword."


You see?

To Jesus, his disciples, followers, and the authors of the gospels, the nations were the enemy.

So the USA is your enemy?

Would I give my enemy the discovery of and cure for a national disease and worldwide plague?

Now I know that its going to spoil the fun of the people who would rather blame hippies, gays, trans people, hollywood, immigrants, titties on TV, the blacks, the mexicans, pregnant women, libtards, democrats, the jews, Hillary, rock and roll, the liberal media, the mafia, imaginary demons and real and jerk offs like you for every evil in the world instead of looking within themselves and for that I am truly sorry.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No two of the Bible thumpers can seem to agree on much, even just in this thread. So SOMEBODY has to be wrong.

Simplest explanation: you all are wrong.

 

[Picaro]

It's a commentary on the nature of money, not govt. itself, neither good nor evil, it's people who make something evil. Civil disobedience is clearly not proscribed, as evident in Jesus' ministry, which was entirely against the Jewish government, since they were a theocracy, and a hereditary one at that, based on genealogies, most of them fake ones at that. Peter wacked the ear off an official, after all. It's a myth that Xians have to be totally pacifist dumbasses.

 

[hobelim]

It's a commentary on the nature of money, not govt. itself, neither good nor evil, it's people who make something evil.

ahh you are both wrong

Anyone who won't do something as simple as confessing to being a worthless sinner and then doing something as holy as setting aside the Law of God and worshipping a human being has to be a real unbelieving evil son of a bitch. A devil demon or at least an atheist, well, maybe even a Jew.

That would be like God giving you a statue of a snake to turn to to be healed and then saying no thanks.

All a bunch of faithless ingrates!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, now we know where to find the absolute truth....shaman hobelim. Please defer to him from now on.

 

[Picaro]

The main point is Jesus saying his kingdom 'is not of this world', paying taxes to the Romans was an irrelevancy, and several other things he's said; taking this verse out of context is again the main pastime of people who have never read the book much less studied it in any detail. In this incident he was also pointing out Jews were already submitting to Caesar, and he was doing nothing they weren''t doing when accepting Roman rules; at the time there were the 'Zealots', who kept stumping for a tax revolt as a result of the Census. Soon they would succeed in getting one, and getting their Temple burned down and getting scattered. This verse is just another confirmation that church and state are indeed separate entities, among other verses .One is a construct of Man, the other of 'God'.

 

[hobelim]

Well, now we know where to find the absolute truth....shaman hobelim. Please defer to him from now on.

I have spoken.

 

[Picaro]

It's a commentary on the nature of money, not govt. itself, neither good nor evil, it's people who make something evil.

ahh you are both wrong

Anyone who won't do something as simple confessing to being a sinner and the doing something as holy as worshipping Jesus has to be a real unbelieving evil son of a bitch. A devil demon or at least an atheist.

That would be like God giving you a statue of a snake to turn to to be healed and then saying no thanks.

All a bunch of faithless ingrates!

Pipe down, moron. You're just embarrassing yourself yet again.

 

[Picaro]

On another level he was also pointing out that Roman rule was beneficial to Judea, something that would indeed anger the Sadducees, since it was them who had a civil war where both sides solicited Roman intervention on their behalves that brought the Romans into Judea in the first place, around 63 B.C., and Jews had more privileges than many provinces had, like not having to submit to the legionary draft and taking oaths to the state.

 

[evenflow1969]

Bible study groups are based on well prepared materials, usually by very well educated members of the Faith. Also, bible studies are essential in bringing the Word to people and develop individual understanding of it.

But with all that well prepared materials, and with all that serious work and time put in by the group leader, can they still be wrong?

Here is an example. Apostle Paul writes to be a good citizen, do as your country tells you to, pay your taxes, and so on. But we already know, that half the countries impose special taxes that are developed specifically against Christians, in order to starve them to death. Most notably, Jordania has no Christian's left, as a result.

So, wouldn't the correct interpretation of Paul's word be, that Christians should no challenge their government, only. If your government is after you, do you have to put out? When Satan is after you, you are told not to put out. So, what is the correct bible study then?

Todays bible does not offer much advice on what to do if the wicked rule. It even suggests that a wicked ruler is a reflection of wicked people and may be judgment rendered by the lord. One must remember that at times in history it was the government decided what testiments would be in the bible it is not surprising that religion morphed to this current state. We are also for the most part relying on government sponsered translations of the original texts. Unless you speak aramaic do realy know what the original texts say?