Atrocities throughout time that could have been avoided by obeying Judaic guidance rules/laws

[Ria_Longhorn]

for the record----PIC should tell who the jew is who claimed that CONSTANTINE wrote the NT.

as to his other psychotic claims------be patient---some day I will address those too.

As to who read the OT and the NT-----well I did---but MOST PEOPLE IN THE US have not----likely including PIC

Rosie alternates between babbling about Constantine rewriting the NT and avoiding answering the obvious, but now claims she didn't, and like every other liar who keeps claiming that, they never cite any specifics that were 'rewritten', just mumble some vague innuendo or other.

the liar, PIC, is INVITED to seek out the post in which I (rosie) claimed that Constantine WROTE the NT. go for it pic. "REWROTE" ?? pic chooses an interesting word-----the NT did not exist as such until it was compiled by Constantine's Nicean council

Rosie can't admit nearly all the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D., and were all well known before 150 A.D. Changing anything in them would be, you know, noticed and rejected, but these tards are just dumb and think somebody over 300 years later would be able to fake stuff and just throw it in there; i.e, they're morons.

Picaro writes:
"... [A]ll the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D.
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

Wrong.

The Gospel of Matthew was written about 85 or 90 CE by an unknown Jewish Christian most probably living in Antioch of Syria (Present-day Antakya, Turkey).

The Gospel of Luke was written -- according to some scholars -- about five years earlier than Matthew; his replacement of Semitic words for Greek ones demonstrates he was writing for a gentile audience in a Greek environment. [Personally, I give Matthean priority over the book of Luke.]

The Gospel of John was authored by more than one hand and its composition, unlike the other three gospels, is 2nd Century CE.

The Gospel of Mark is the earliest book, usually dated 65-75 CE.

 

[Ria_Longhorn]

for the one crucified that was their last scene, no vengeance - who put them there by the way.

Followers vengeance, many of those on the list created a hate monster even they could not control.
But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

.

But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

not sure what you are saying there but the one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengeance but justice. the untimely death of jesus.

BreezeWood wrote:

"[T]he one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengenance but justice, the untimely death of jesus."
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

Here's Roman historian Tacitus (b. ca 56 - ca 117) , on the matter:

"Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate." (From Annals 15:44)

 

[Picaro]

for the record----PIC should tell who the jew is who claimed that CONSTANTINE wrote the NT.

as to his other psychotic claims------be patient---some day I will address those too.

As to who read the OT and the NT-----well I did---but MOST PEOPLE IN THE US have not----likely including PIC

Rosie alternates between babbling about Constantine rewriting the NT and avoiding answering the obvious, but now claims she didn't, and like every other liar who keeps claiming that, they never cite any specifics that were 'rewritten', just mumble some vague innuendo or other.

the liar, PIC, is INVITED to seek out the post in which I (rosie) claimed that Constantine WROTE the NT. go for it pic. "REWROTE" ?? pic chooses an interesting word-----the NT did not exist as such until it was compiled by Constantine's Nicean council

Rosie can't admit nearly all the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D., and were all well known before 150 A.D. Changing anything in them would be, you know, noticed and rejected, but these tards are just dumb and think somebody over 300 years later would be able to fake stuff and just throw it in there; i.e, they're morons.

Picaro writes:
"... [A]ll the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D.
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

Wrong.

The Gospel of Matthew was written about 85 or 90 CE by an unknown Jewish Christian most probably living in Antioch of Syria (Present-day Antakya, Turkey).

The Gospel of Luke was written -- according to some scholars -- about five years earlier than Matthew; his replacement of Semitic words for Greek ones demonstrates he was writing for a gentile audience in a Greek environment. [Personally, I give Matthean priority over the book of Luke.]

The Gospel of John was authored by more than one hand and its composition, unlike the other three gospels, is 2nd Century CE.

The Gospel of Mark is the earliest book, usually dated 65-75 CE.

Judaism was an oral tradition; the Gospels were composed years before they were put to writing. As for Greek, it was also the language of Jewish scholars in those times, as result of Alexander's conquests and the 'Successors' influence; the 'Decapolis' cities were right on the borders of Judea and also very popular with Roman scholars as well. Hebrew was almost a secret language, few Jews read or spoke it outside the priesthoods. Aramaic was the common language among Jewish people. The book of Daniel is also written in two different languages as well.

 

[Picaro]

for the one crucified that was their last scene, no vengeance - who put them there by the way.

Followers vengeance, many of those on the list created a hate monster even they could not control.
But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

.

But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

not sure what you are saying there but the one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengeance but justice. the untimely death of jesus.

BreezeWood wrote:

"[T]he one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengenance but justice, the untimely death of jesus."
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

Here's Roman historian Tacitus (b. ca 56 - ca 117) , on the matter:

"Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate." (From Annals 15:44)

Jewish court sentenced him to death; the Romans carried out the sentence, as per their usual policy of reserving executions of anybody to the Roman state. The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. This is where our own traditions of common law come from.

 

[irosie91]

for the record----PIC should tell who the jew is who claimed that CONSTANTINE wrote the NT.

as to his other psychotic claims------be patient---some day I will address those too.

As to who read the OT and the NT-----well I did---but MOST PEOPLE IN THE US have not----likely including PIC

Rosie alternates between babbling about Constantine rewriting the NT and avoiding answering the obvious, but now claims she didn't, and like every other liar who keeps claiming that, they never cite any specifics that were 'rewritten', just mumble some vague innuendo or other.

the liar, PIC, is INVITED to seek out the post in which I (rosie) claimed that Constantine WROTE the NT. go for it pic. "REWROTE" ?? pic chooses an interesting word-----the NT did not exist as such until it was compiled by Constantine's Nicean council

Rosie can't admit nearly all the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D., and were all well known before 150 A.D. Changing anything in them would be, you know, noticed and rejected, but these tards are just dumb and think somebody over 300 years later would be able to fake stuff and just throw it in there; i.e, they're morons.

Picaro writes:
"... [A]ll the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D.
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

Wrong.

The Gospel of Matthew was written about 85 or 90 CE by an unknown Jewish Christian most probably living in Antioch of Syria (Present-day Antakya, Turkey).

The Gospel of Luke was written -- according to some scholars -- about five years earlier than Matthew; his replacement of Semitic words for Greek ones demonstrates he was writing for a gentile audience in a Greek environment. [Personally, I give Matthean priority over the book of Luke.]

The Gospel of John was authored by more than one hand and its composition, unlike the other three gospels, is 2nd Century CE.

The Gospel of Mark is the earliest book, usually dated 65-75 CE.

Judaism was an oral tradition; the Gospels were composed years before they were put to writing. As for Greek, it was also the language of Jewish scholars in those times, as result of Alexander's conquests and the 'Successors' influence; the 'Decapolis' cities were right on the borders of Judea and also very popular with Roman scholars as well. Hebrew was almost a secret language, few Jews read or spoke it outside the priesthoods. Aramaic was the common language among Jewish people. The book of Daniel is also written in two different languages as well.

except for the statement that the book of Daniel was written in two different languages-----(Daniel lived in Babylon) everything that Pic wrote is BS

 

[irosie91]

Rosie alternates between babbling about Constantine rewriting the NT and avoiding answering the obvious, but now claims she didn't, and like every other liar who keeps claiming that, they never cite any specifics that were 'rewritten', just mumble some vague innuendo or other.

the liar, PIC, is INVITED to seek out the post in which I (rosie) claimed that Constantine WROTE the NT. go for it pic. "REWROTE" ?? pic chooses an interesting word-----the NT did not exist as such until it was compiled by Constantine's Nicean council

Rosie can't admit nearly all the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D., and were all well known before 150 A.D. Changing anything in them would be, you know, noticed and rejected, but these tards are just dumb and think somebody over 300 years later would be able to fake stuff and just throw it in there; i.e, they're morons.

Picaro writes:
"... [A]ll the books were composed and written down before 70 A.D.
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

Wrong.

The Gospel of Matthew was written about 85 or 90 CE by an unknown Jewish Christian most probably living in Antioch of Syria (Present-day Antakya, Turkey).

The Gospel of Luke was written -- according to some scholars -- about five years earlier than Matthew; his replacement of Semitic words for Greek ones demonstrates he was writing for a gentile audience in a Greek environment. [Personally, I give Matthean priority over the book of Luke.]

The Gospel of John was authored by more than one hand and its composition, unlike the other three gospels, is 2nd Century CE.

The Gospel of Mark is the earliest book, usually dated 65-75 CE.

Judaism was an oral tradition; the Gospels were composed years before they were put to writing. As for Greek, it was also the language of Jewish scholars in those times, as result of Alexander's conquests and the 'Successors' influence; the 'Decapolis' cities were right on the borders of Judea and also very popular with Roman scholars as well. Hebrew was almost a secret language, few Jews read or spoke it outside the priesthoods. Aramaic was the common language among Jewish people. The book of Daniel is also written in two different languages as well.

except for the statement that the book of Daniel was written in two different languages-----(Daniel lived in Babylon) everything that Pic wrote is BS

Pic is stymied again------he is reduced to GIGGLES

 

[BreezeWood]

for the one crucified that was their last scene, no vengeance - who put them there by the way.

Followers vengeance, many of those on the list created a hate monster even they could not control.
But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

.

But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

not sure what you are saying there but the one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengeance but justice. the untimely death of jesus.

BreezeWood wrote:

"[T]he one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengenance but justice, the untimely death of jesus."
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

Here's Roman historian Tacitus (b. ca 56 - ca 117) , on the matter:

"Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate." (From Annals 15:44)

.

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

(they) spent a century, 4th writing the christian bible ... the paragraph above is true - to the extent it was (they) that crucified their innocent victim. who stayed their course and did not bend to their brutality.

who's "we" , Ria. - those that have yet to be brought to justice for their crime ...

 

[HaShev]

And here's the texts problems that you guys brought up:
1) the ONLY Christ at the time of A.D. era Pilate was Theudas by the Jordan river who was crucified "by Rome" for his revolt against Rome.
The king Herod (died 4bc) & Lysanias(died 35bc)era Galilean christ died in 6bc before the Pilate era.
2)The character in the mythology of Jesus did not claim to be
"son of man" which someone here used in mentioning Mark's verses written after the martyrs era and written by others under rhe characters name.
The NT text and other gospels not used described he was emulating (Rev 1:13) son of man and that rhey did not understand son of man was coming from him(a message) and would be another coming later in time in his own new name. They also use third person tense everytime they mention the son of man.
sources backing this fact:
This created combined icon called Jesus repeatedly claimed:
A)that he wasn't son of man that he was emulating (like unto)-rev1:13,rev22:16
B)that son of Man will not be in the person of Jesus, but in a different incarnation involving a totally different human being LUKE 6:5, 9:26 , 9:55-56, 12:10 , 17:30 , 18:8, 22:69, John 3:13, Matthew 25:11-13, Mark 14:62
and Mathew20:28.
C) that you'd come in his name saying HE was christ deceiving many even the elect.

 

[Ria_Longhorn]

for the one crucified that was their last scene, no vengeance - who put them there by the way.

Followers vengeance, many of those on the list created a hate monster even they could not control.
But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

.

But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

not sure what you are saying there but the one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengeance but justice. the untimely death of jesus.

BreezeWood wrote:

"[T]he one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengenance but justice, the untimely death of jesus."
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

Here's Roman historian Tacitus (b. ca 56 - ca 117) , on the matter:

"Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate." (From Annals 15:44)

Jewish court sentenced him to death; the Romans carried out the sentence, as per their usual policy of reserving executions of anybody to the Roman state. The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. This is where our own traditions of common law come from.

Picaro wrote:
"The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. "
= = = = = = = =

Ria Longhorn replies:

Jewish Stephen, the first Christian martyr (Acts 6:1 - 7:60), was executed by stoning. If the Sanhedrin wanted Jesus dead, they would have stoned him.

 

[HaShev]

for the one crucified that was their last scene, no vengeance - who put them there by the way.

Followers vengeance, many of those on the list created a hate monster even they could not control.
But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

.

But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

not sure what you are saying there but the one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengeance but justice. the untimely death of jesus.

BreezeWood wrote:

"[T]he one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengenance but justice, the untimely death of jesus."
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

Here's Roman historian Tacitus (b. ca 56 - ca 117) , on the matter:

"Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate." (From Annals 15:44)

Jewish court sentenced him to death; the Romans carried out the sentence, as per their usual policy of reserving executions of anybody to the Roman state. The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. This is where our own traditions of common law come from.

Picaro wrote:
"The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. "
= = = = = = = =

Ria Longhorn replies:

Jewish Stephen, the first Christian martyr (Acts 6:1 - 7:60), was executed by stoning. If the Sanhedrin wanted Jesus dead, they would have stoned him.

The blaming of the Sanhedrin was Rome's displacement tactic to demonize the Jews when confiscating religious authority to their new masked compiled religion.
One of the compiled figures used for the myth of Jesus was prefered by Rome because he was half Roman kfather was Panderas a Roman Soldier)-Yeshu son of Mary of 100bc was not a revolter nor sentenced by Rome. He was breaking the law regarding Egyptian influenced cultism and maggis scams (Benny Hinn type scaming) so as you noted his elders sentenced him to stoning and hanging as was the punishment in his 88-100 bc era. The Act of stoning and hanging on a tree is even accounted in the NT.**see sources below**
So in compiling the figure there is 2 blames Yeshu sentenced by his brethren and Yehuda and Theudas sentenced for Roman revolts by Rome.
By combining Christs Rome favors the Harlot Mary's christ to deflect blame while swallowing up all christ cults into one newly named blanket term=christians (those who follow "a" christ)
Remember Paul and James were at odds claiming each was teaching another christ then they were.
Christ as any converged character would, needed a new name, new birth date, had 2 jobs, 2 blames, 2 home towns, era does not add up to characters in the story, 2 ages he lasted to, 2 methods of persecution hanged & crucified, 2 descriptions of appearances, etc...all proof of a compiled figure.

Sources:
The NT sources Mark and John match the Passover sentencing of the 100bc figure Yeshu ben Pandera (also called Stada) and hanged as the process:

Acts 5:30 "Jesus, whom ye slew (stoned)and hanged on a tree" Acts 10:39 "whom they slew and hanged on a tree" Acts 13:29 "they took him down from the tree" 1 Peter 2:24 "who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree" Galatians 3:13 "Christ... being made a curse upon us... Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree"

Sources for the history of (Yeshu) Jesus: philosopher Celsus (178 CE) Christian writer Epiphanius (c.320-403 CE), the Christian apologist Origen (c.185-254 CE) Within the Talmud Shabbos 104, the gemara explicitly discusses the mother being Stada and the father being Pandera. Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zerah II 40d)and in the Tosefta on Hullin II, and (Sanhedrin 43a & 67a). This story is further expanded upon in the Tosefta and Baraitas.
2 accounts:
-Dr. Franz Hartman -
& Gerald Massey's Lectures Originally published in a private edition c. 1900


According to the Babylonian Gemara to the Mishna of Tract "Shabbath," this Jehoshua, the son of Pandira and Stada, was stoned to death as a wizard, in the city of Lud, or Lydda,

Jesus ben Stada (or Pandera) was placedin the time period of about 90 B.C. in Lydda, a town Peter is said tohave visited in Acts.
The early church father Epiphanius around 400 said Pandera was the grandfather of Jesus (the story of Yeshu ben Panderas called Yeshu ben Stada son of Mary Stada).

 

[irosie91]

sheeeesh ----watta mess. I had no idea. Yesterday I watched the Movie "KING OF KINGS" Among many other characters profiled "barabass" was a player.
The story I heard as a kid was that barabass was a simple thief-----which seemed
kinda stupid because why would the romans care? The movie presents him as
an insurrectionist who enacted organized guerilla attacks on big roman legions as they marched around in the Judean hills. Now THAT is a person that the romans
would crucify-------as to Jesus (the standard one) ---his buddy, JOHN of the bathtub,
had called Rome's fave HEROD's wife-----da whore and got wacked right there in
the palace. (like a Hilary job?)

 

[HaShev]

sheeeesh ----watta mess. I had no idea. Yesterday I watched the Movie "KING OF KINGS" Among many other characters profiled "barabass" was a player.
The story I heard as a kid was that barabass was a simple thief-----which seemed
kinda stupid because why would the romans care? The movie presents him as
an insurrectionist who enacted organized guerilla attacks on big roman legions as they marched around in the Judean hills. Now THAT is a person that the romans
would crucify-------as to Jesus (the standard one) ---his buddy, JOHN of the bathtub,
had called Rome's fave HEROD's wife-----da whore and got wacked right there in
the palace. (like a Hilary job?)

The king Herod & Lysanias era christ was named and termed Yehuda the Galilean often confused with a thief with similar name (Yehuda the Galionite)who overturned and ransacked the tables outside the Temple therefore if the Jesus Barabbas story is not just a ruse to hide the character Jesus thievery or sentenced crime by making
Jesus bar (son of )Abba (father) a second seperate character
Jesus Barabbas, then most likely the 2 confused characters in the Barabbas story comes from the historical Yehudas.
Source: Josephus : on Yehuda the Galilean and the similar confused named thief murderer Yehuda the Galionite(used for the table turners & Jesus Barabbas scenes):
Book 18 chapter 1 is where the heart of the info on the tax revolt and teaching of the crucified Yehuda of Galilee is mentioned.
NOTE: Luke mentions him once, in
Acts 5:37, and Josephus several times, once here, sect. 6; and B. XX. ch. 5. sect. 2; Of the War, B. II. ch. 8. sect. 1; and ch. 17. sect. 8, calls this Judas, who was the pestilent author of that seditious doctrine and temper which brought the Jewish nation to utter destruction, a Galilean; but here (sect. 1) Josephus calls him a Gaulonite, of the city of Gamala; it is a great question where this Judas was born, whether in Galilee on the west side, or in Gaulonitis on the east side, of the river Jordan; while, in the place just now cited out of the Antiquities, B. XX. ch. 5. sect. 2, he is not only called a Galilean, but it is added to his story, "as I have signified in the books that go before these," as if he had still called him a Galilean in those Antiquities before, as well as in that particular place, as Dean Aldrich observes, Of the War, B. II. ch. 8. sect. 1.

 

[bodecea]

Our day and age our culture, Progressive leftists, Main Stream Media, many Liberals in the entertainment industry have become more and more lawless, supporting and protecting lawlessness and lawless ones. Throughout history our atrocities and inhumane events could have been prevented, not just by the Noahide laws or 10 commandments, but also this little known ancient advice/rule/law.
The Dead Sea Scrolls
(4Q266 -7 fr 5) warned us of a rule they had back then about not listening to leaders/teachers who had been politically imprisoned as we see why through history, if only we had obeyed the simple rule.
This is a List of Political prisoners off the the top of my head, who came out with a lust for blood and hate for humanity as they turned into psychopathic murderers who caused atrocities and were the cause of wars and more murders:
Paul of Tarsus(who was not singularly nor historically Saul[not Jewish] as taught by founding Roman Church),
And All 3 christ figures (Yeshu, Yehuda, Theudas),used to make the Jesus image, were all political prisoners and that image and texts (3/4 attributed to Paul's writing) was used to cause thousands of wars and over 50 million murders. Other enormous atrocities were caused by political prisoners such as:
Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Saddam, Arafat, Zarquawi, Turkey's tyrant Erdogan,Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and I think that Islamic radical guy in Africa Mokhtar Belmokhtar who started many wars and attrocities there (the guy with one eye) might have been a political prisoner, he seemed hell bent on that subject himself regarding radicals imprisoned and breaking them out of prisons or he broke out of prison.
All of these were political prisoners before they massacred.

Idi Amin might be another qualifying for that list: he had similarities to Saddam: Deserted by his father at an early age, he was brought up by his mother like Saddam and came from a small Islamic tribe.
President Obote put Amin under house arrest so technically he was also a political prisoner before he declared himself president and did a number on the people mainly ' hunting down Obote's supporters' much like Saddam hunted down kurds and Shiites, & his opposition supporters.

Or Buddhist principles......

 

[Picaro]

for the one crucified that was their last scene, no vengeance - who put them there by the way.

Followers vengeance, many of those on the list created a hate monster even they could not control.
But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

.

But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

not sure what you are saying there but the one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengeance but justice. the untimely death of jesus.

BreezeWood wrote:

"[T]he one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengenance but justice, the untimely death of jesus."
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

Here's Roman historian Tacitus (b. ca 56 - ca 117) , on the matter:

"Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate." (From Annals 15:44)

Jewish court sentenced him to death; the Romans carried out the sentence, as per their usual policy of reserving executions of anybody to the Roman state. The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. This is where our own traditions of common law come from.

Picaro wrote:
"The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. "
= = = = = = = =

Ria Longhorn replies:

Jewish Stephen, the first Christian martyr (Acts 6:1 - 7:60), was executed by stoning. If the Sanhedrin wanted Jesus dead, they would have stoned him.

That would have been true before the Roman occupation; afterwards Roman law reserves executions as a prerogative of the Roman state itself, due to the dualities of Roman citizenship and local rules, which left the local Courts as having the power to hand out death sentences but denied them the power to carry them out themselves. That right they reserved to Rome.

 

[Ria_Longhorn]

Followers vengeance, many of those on the list created a hate monster even they could not control.
But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

.

But if we are gonna nit pick, followers claim he is alive and all powerful and thus responsible for the vengeance.

not sure what you are saying there but the one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengeance but justice. the untimely death of jesus.

BreezeWood wrote:

"[T]he one crucified was not what 4th century christianity made out of them in fact those people have yet to be brought to justice for the crime they committed then and their crimes to this date. not vengenance but justice, the untimely death of jesus."
= = = = = = = =

Ria_Longhorn replies:

We Gentiles killed Jesus. Jesus speaking:

"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the son of man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the GENTILES who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and PUT HIM TO DEATH ..." -- Mark 10: 33,34 [All emphases mine.]

Here's Roman historian Tacitus (b. ca 56 - ca 117) , on the matter:

"Christus ... was put to death by Pontius Pilate." (From Annals 15:44)

Jewish court sentenced him to death; the Romans carried out the sentence, as per their usual policy of reserving executions of anybody to the Roman state. The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. This is where our own traditions of common law come from.

Picaro wrote:
"The Jewish state at the time had legal status as a 'temple state', with a considerable amount of independence in their administrative, legal, and political affairs, but could not execute anybody, nor could any other states under Rome's protection. "
= = = = = = = =

Ria Longhorn replies:

Jewish Stephen, the first Christian martyr (Acts 6:1 - 7:60), was executed by stoning. If the Sanhedrin wanted Jesus dead, they would have stoned him.

That would have been true before the Roman occupation; afterwards Roman law reserves executions as a prerogative of the Roman state itself, due to the dualities of Roman citizenship and local rules, which left the local Courts as having the power to hand out death sentences but denied them the power to carry them out themselves. That right they reserved to Rome.

Stephen was stoned in 36 CE while under Roman occupation.

 

[HaShev]

Ummmm if you guys are so interested in ACTUAL history then why out of the thousands of years am I the only one who ever noticed Lysanias in the Jesus accounts historically died in 36bc and King Herod in 4BC making an ad era christ a different account of a different christ figure thus combining the many
(trinity of) christs into one new one with a new name?

History contradicts the tales:
Jesus was supposed to have been baptized by the baptist John soon after John the Baptist had started baptizing and preaching in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias, i.e. 28-29 C.E., when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judaea i.e. 26-36 C.E. According to the New Testament, this also happened when Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene and Annas and Caiaphas were high priests. But Lysanias ruled Abilene from c. 40 B.C.E until he was executed in 36 B.C.E by Mark Antony, about 60 years before the date for Tiberias and about 30 years before the supposed birth of Jesus!-oops.

 

[Taz]

Even the atrocities the Hebrews/Israelites committed?

circumcision (of the male thingy) is not an atrocity. nor is KASHRUT-----it is just a little
boring.

Are you trying to tell us that you don't prefer a circumcised cock?

 

[irosie91]

Even the atrocities the Hebrews/Israelites committed?

circumcision (of the male thingy) is not an atrocity. nor is KASHRUT-----it is just a little
boring.

Are you trying to tell us that you don't prefer a circumcised cock?

UGH ---there is no comparison-----the first time I saw a goy thingy----
I laughed. Do you know what a person has to do to EXAMINE one of
them things?. It ain't pretty. Ask your urologist cousin what can be hiding
between the cute little glans and that weird AWNING

 

[jasonlee3071]

I'm not sure that following Judaism will prevent atrocities from occuring. I know as a fact that christianity/islam haven't prevented these from happening and instead have been the cause of various atrocities down through the ages and even now.
Both religions by the way more or less are descended from judaism and heavily influenced by it.

 

[luchitociencia]

It's ironic that the Jew who is always tearing down Christianity is now telling us we should act more Christian.

He might be one of those Harvard professors.