Zone1 Do most Jews believe they killed Jesus?

[surada]

You're all wrong. What is the point of professing to believe in a "god" who is powerless? Small g, when speaking of the real God it's always capitalized.

What are you talking about?

Spiritual hunger and thirst is addressed in the New testament.

John 4:5-30 - Only Jesus can quench your spiritual thirst - The Hope Church Family

What one thing would make you truly happy?

hopechurchfamily.org

 

[JustAGuy1]

What are you talking about?

Spiritual hunger and thirst is addressed in the New testament.

John 4:5-30 - Only Jesus can quench your spiritual thirst - The Hope Church Family

What one thing would make you truly happy?

hopechurchfamily.org

A god is not a God without supernatural abilities. Do try and keep up.

 

[BreezeWood]

To give a direct answer to the antisemite’s question: Jews know they didn’t kill Jesus.

lisa, did you miss ...

All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!” Matthew 27:24-25

and barabbas - the romans gave you a second chance, sinner.

give the denial a thought - the heavens will not be your friend. good luck.

 

[ding]

He doesn’t have to be either. He was a leader of a small band of Jews.

That's not how history recorded it. But putting that aside you are making my argument for me that she sees Jesus as a political figure.

 

[ding]

I don't believe in the supernatural, however that doesn't mean Jesus was a political figure. He makes it abundantly clear his kingdom is not on earth. Jesus was a spiritual leader.

That's an odd position for a supposed Christian to take. To clarify your statement... a spiritual leader making political statements.

I disagree.

 

[ding]

really - "the gospel according to mathew" - that makes ...

View attachment 671453

two of you.

bing, have you found the etched tablets from heaven - yet ... along with your other phony 25K documents, surly you can come up with something. and how you waited 400 years to write your equally phony c bible as well.

- the proof "is in the pudding".

You need to prove that first.

 

[ding]

liberation theology, self determination

Are diametrically opposed to each other.

 

[JustAGuy1]

That's an odd position for a supposed Christian to take. To clarify your statement... a spiritual leader making political statements.

I disagree.

She is not a Christian. She denies nearly all of the essential tenets of Christianity.

 

[Rigby5]

Jesus has no footprint in Judaism any more than Mohammad has one in Christianity.

Then that would be a yes.
Christians have tried genocide against Moslems many times, pretty much continually.
So if you are saying there is a parallel, then you are saying Jews want to murder all Christians.

 

[ding]

Most scholars think that feeding the 5000 is the spiritual food of Jesus's teachings.. just like his message quenches spiritual thirst. Both are referenced throughout scripture.

So do you rationalize every miracle performed by Jesus as spiritual teaching? How many was that exactly? You are going to challenge Hobelim for the title of secular Jesus champion.

So when he cured blindness or leprosy or raised the dead, what was that about?

 

[ding]

She is not a Christian. She denies nearly all of the essential tenets of Christianity.

I agree, but that's been her claim.

 

[surada]

That's an odd position for a supposed Christian to take. To clarify your statement... a spiritual leader making political statements.

I disagree.

Teaching them how to survive isn't political. When Titus and his foreign armies controlled Jerusalem the new Christians fled to the mountains... to Pella and avoided the tribulation.

 

[ding]

Serious theologians have far more education than you.

14 Bible verses about Spiritual Hunger

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

Blindly accepting knowledge on the authority of others is usually not a good idea.

 

[Rigby5]

Is this a serious question? No Jew would say that Jesus deserved to be put to death. The other guy that was crucified next to him - Barbaras? - didn’t deserve a death sentence either. These were different times, though.

And as I said, it’s not really a point of discussion at all, but mostly we regret that the NT blamed it all on the Jews, and because of that, Jews have been subjected to 2000 years of persecution, expulsions, and slaughter by the millions.

Jews believe in the coming of the Messiah, so then Jesus could have been the one they were waiting for, and deserved a closer look before killing him.
You keep saying there was no intersection, but there obviously could have been, since Jesus could have been the Messiah?
How would anyone know?

 

[surada]

So do you rationalize every miracle performed by Jesus as spiritual teaching? How many was that exactly? You are going to challenge Hobelim for the title of secular Jesus champion.

So when he cured blindness or leprosy or raised the dead, what was that about?

I have no doubt Jesus was a holy man, but his followers seem to have embellished the story. Spiritual healing doesn't require the supernatural or magic.

 

[surada]

Blindly accepting knowledge on the authority of others is usually not a good idea.

I agree.

 

[Rigby5]

Are diametrically opposed to each other.

Wrong.
Liberation theology and self determination are not at all opposed to each other.

{...
Liberation theology is a Christian theological approach emphasizing the liberation of the oppressed. In certain contexts, it engages socio-economic analyses, with "social concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed peoples".[1] In other contexts, it addresses other forms of inequality, such as race or caste.

Liberation theology is best known in the Latin American context,[2] especially within Catholicism in the 1960s after the Second Vatican Council, where it became the political praxis of theologians such as Gustavo Gutiérrez, Leonardo Boff, and Jesuits Juan Luis Segundo and Jon Sobrino, who popularized the phrase "preferential option for the poor". This expression was used first by Jesuit Fr. General Pedro Arrupe in 1968 and soon after the World Synod of Catholic Bishops in 1971 chose as its theme "Justice in the World".[3][4]

The Latin American context also produced Protestant advocates of liberation theology, such as Rubem Alves,[5][6] José Míguez Bonino, and C. René Padilla, who in the 1970s called for integral mission, emphasizing evangelism and social responsibility.
...}

Societies apply the use of force, it can be physical, as in the physical slavery before the Civil War, or it can be economic slavery, such as segregation, monopolies, poll taxes, etc.
Individuals can not free themselves from external abuses, whether physical or economic.
Self determination can only begin AFTER a whole group has been liberated.

 

[ding]

Teaching them how to survive isn't political. When Titus and his foreign armies controlled Jerusalem the new Christians fled to the mountains... to Pella and avoided the tribulation.

What does this have to do with the Sermon on the Mount? The Sermon on the Mount was given to Israelites, not "new Christians." The first part of his mission is limited to Israel. You are conflating events because you are trying to create a narrative that doesn't exist. Jesus did not give you this option.

In the “Sermon on the Mount” the theme of righteousness is prominent, and even at this early stage of the ministry the note of opposition is struck between Jesus and the Pharisees, who are designated as “the hypocrites” (Mt 6:2, 5, 16). The righteousness of his disciples must surpass that of the scribes and Pharisees; otherwise, in spite of their alleged following of Jesus, they will not enter into the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:20). Righteousness means doing the will of the heavenly Father (Mt 7:21), and his will is proclaimed in a manner that is startling to all who have identified it with the law of Moses. The antitheses of the Sermon (Mt 5:21–48) both accept (Mt 5:21–30, 43–48) and reject (Mt 5:31–42) elements of that law, and in the former case the understanding of the law’s demands is deepened and extended. The antitheses are the best commentary on the meaning of Jesus’ claim that he has come not to abolish but to fulfill the law (Mt 5:17). What is meant by fulfillment of the law is not the demand to keep it exactly as it stood before the coming of Jesus, but rather his bringing the law to be a lasting expression of the will of God, and in that fulfillment there is much that will pass away. Should this appear contradictory to his saying that “until heaven and earth pass away” not even the smallest part of the law will pass (Mt 5:18), that time of fulfillment is not the dissolution of the universe but the coming of the new age, which will occur with Jesus’ death and resurrection. While righteousness in the new age will continue to mean conduct that is in accordance with the law, it will be conduct in accordance with the law as expounded and interpreted by Jesus (cf. Mt 28:20, “…all that I have commanded you”).

Though Jesus speaks harshly about the Pharisees in the Sermon, his judgment is not solely a condemnation of them. The Pharisees are portrayed as a negative example for his disciples, and his condemnation of those who claim to belong to him while disobeying his word is no less severe (Mt 7:21–23, 26–27).

In Mt 4:23 a summary statement of Jesus’ activity speaks not only of his teaching and proclaiming the gospel but of his “curing every disease and illness among the people”; this is repeated almost verbatim in Mt 9:35. The narrative section that follows the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 8:1–9:38) is composed principally of accounts of those merciful deeds of Jesus, but it is far from being simply a collection of stories about miraculous cures. The nature of the community that Jesus will establish is shown; it will always be under the protection of him whose power can deal with all dangers (Mt 8:23–27), but it is only for those who are prepared to follow him at whatever cost (Mt 8:16–22), not only believing Israelites but Gentiles who have come to faith in him (Mt 8:10–12). The disciples begin to have some insight, however imperfect, into the mystery of Jesus’ person. They wonder about him whom “the winds and the sea obey” (Mt 8:27), and they witness his bold declaration of the forgiveness of the paralytic’s sins (Mt 9:2). That episode of the narrative moves on two levels. When the crowd sees the cure that testifies to the authority of Jesus, the Son of Man, to forgive sins (Mt 9:6), they glorify God “who had given such authority to human beings” (Mt 9:8). The forgiveness of sins is now not the prerogative of Jesus alone but of “human beings,” that is, of the disciples who constitute the community of Jesus, the church. The ecclesial character of this narrative section could hardly be more plainly indicated.

The end of the section prepares for the discourse on the church’s mission (Mt 10:5–42). Jesus is moved to pity at the sight of the crowds who are like sheep without a shepherd (Mt 9:36), and he sends out the twelve disciples to make the proclamation with which his own ministry began, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Mt 10:7; cf. Mt 4:17), and to drive out demons and cure the sick as he has done (Mt 10:1). Their mission is limited to Israel (Mt 10:5–6) as Jesus’ own was (Mt 15:24), yet in Mt 15:16 that perspective broadens and the discourse begins to speak of the mission that the disciples will have after the resurrection and of the severe persecution that will attend it (Mt 10:18). Again, the discourse moves on two levels: that of the time of Jesus and that of the time of the church.

 

[ding]

Wrong.
Liberation theology and self determination are not at all opposed to each other.

{...
Liberation theology is a Christian theological approach emphasizing the liberation of the oppressed. In certain contexts, it engages socio-economic analyses, with "social concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed peoples".[1] In other contexts, it addresses other forms of inequality, such as race or caste.

Liberation theology is best known in the Latin American context,[2] especially within Catholicism in the 1960s after the Second Vatican Council, where it became the political praxis of theologians such as Gustavo Gutiérrez, Leonardo Boff, and Jesuits Juan Luis Segundo and Jon Sobrino, who popularized the phrase "preferential option for the poor". This expression was used first by Jesuit Fr. General Pedro Arrupe in 1968 and soon after the World Synod of Catholic Bishops in 1971 chose as its theme "Justice in the World".[3][4]

The Latin American context also produced Protestant advocates of liberation theology, such as Rubem Alves,[5][6] José Míguez Bonino, and C. René Padilla, who in the 1970s called for integral mission, emphasizing evangelism and social responsibility.
...}

Societies apply the use of force, it can be physical, as in the physical slavery before the Civil War, or it can be economic slavery, such as segregation, monopolies, poll taxes, etc.
Individuals can not free themselves from external abuses, whether physical or economic.
Self determination can only begin AFTER a whole group has been liberated.

Liberation theology is effectively socialism. Socialism is the antithesis of self determination.

 

[irosie91]

Then that would be a yes.
Christians have tried genocide against Moslems many times, pretty much continually.
So if you are saying there is a parallel, then you are saying Jews want to murder all Christians.

You are very confused. Christians have not tried GENOCIDE against muslims nor have jews tried genocide against christians