Okay I have re-read Luke 19 and find that in the beginning Jesus says that he is telling a parable. During Jesus parable in Luke, he was relating a story about a nobleman wanting his enemies brought before him to be slain.
The problem comes immediately after the parable in which Jesus is talking about a nobleman wanting enemies to be killed when Jesus says:
27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Is this the place in this Luke chapter wehre Jesus parable ends and then he is talking about himself or does the parable continue? It seems like that in line 29 either Jesus or the Nobleman sent two of his disciples. Whose disciples do they belong to and who is sending them?
28 And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.
29 And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount called the mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples,
The parable ends at verse 27. Look at verse 28, which you have just quoted: "And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem." That verse indicates the end of the parable and the continuation of the narrative. I don't want to get into a side-debate, but I don't use the King James Version, because there is not adequate punctuation. In short, there are no quotation marks. I have the New King James Version, which contains the same verses, slightly modernized to use "you" instead of "thou," and includes punctuation to avoid this kind of confusion. But look again at that verse 28, it indicates that the prior verse, 27, was the end of the parable.
Unfortunately those same commandments you claim for Jesus are identical to the original ones in the Old Testament G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In other words, these commandments from Jesus were just a carbon copy of Moses revelation from G-d Himeself more than 1,300 years earlier.
That certainly doesn't disprove that Jesus has a connection with G-d, that He is repeating Himself.
If not then, when is Jesus represented by the Nobleman. If as you say Jesus was represented by the Nobleman in his parable, then it would be Jesus giving by example (parable story) that it was actually he and not a Nobelman who wanted his enemies brought before him to be slain. The second coming of Jesus in the Nobleman's return somehow escapes any learning experience in the parable as the second coming can only be interpreted in the light of Christian dogma.
The return of the nobleman represents G-d at Judgment Day. This is not an escape of learning of experience, it is definitely meant as a teaching- we are given certain gifts during our lives, represented by the minas, and we are to make use of them and not to hoard them. What are the minas, in reality? They are faith, love, charity, prophecy, witness, etc., they are spiritual gifts. We are not to hoard them, to not keep our "light under a bushel" so to speak, but to share them so they may be doubled, by being taken up by others through our example. It is very close to what I hear you saying about Judaism encouraging contributing good to the world, and it is important to remember that Christianity sprang from Judaism. All the disciples were Jews, all the people to whom Jesus gave the Sermon on the Mount were Jews. It was Judea in which He spoke.
Why would the Jewish leaders reject Jesus when in fact they were waiting for the coming of the long prophecized Messiah to save them from the Romans? In fact, the Jewish historian Josephus (minus the later additions about Jesus) spoke of the hope of the Jewish people for G-d to send a Messiah to save them from the persection of the Romans.
You ask a very good question. The answer is contained in the question- the long prophesied Messiah did not come to save them from the Romans, the way they thought, did He? Not the way they thought. He did arrive. But not to save the Jews from the Romans. The Jews would go on to survive the Romans, as you have pointed out. The Messiah will arrive at the end of times to be King of the Jews, as we are waiting for Him today. But when Jesus came to Judea, it was His First Coming. He didn't come to be the Messiah king of the world, yet. It wasn't time. But what He did accomplish was to bring G-d, your G-d, the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and Aaron, to the attention of the Gentiles.
In fact, the early Pauline Christians did persecute the Jewish people long before Constantine.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revelations 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting from the book of Revelation, the Christian churched began to persecute the Jews by cursing them as sons of the Devil and cursed.
You are committing a logical error here, which is also committed by anti-Semites. I'm not insulting you, but you need to understand- this is written specifically to the church in Smyrna, where there were those who called themselves Jews, but were idol-worshippers. This is not, as you are suggesting, a tarring of all Jews- it says they are not Jews. Also, there is no persecution here- the Revelation given to John on the Isle of Patmos was a vision. No one was killed or persecuted.
The original blood libel against the Jews by the earliest Christian church of Paul.
You will need to bring out a good source for this statement. I know what "blood libel" is, and it was not spoken of by Paul.
Sorry but these facts about the Gentiles not caring about the Jews good or bad is as far from reality as New York City is from the Andromeda galaxy. How many centuries has the Christian church tried to force conversions not only on the Jews but many people around the globe by torture, fire or death?
You are misreading me, again. I didn't say the Gentiles don't care about the Jews good or bad. I can only defend my viewpoint if you represent it correctly, otherwise this is just a flame war. I said:
But the Gentiles wouldn't know anything about the Jews if faith in Jesus hadn't brought the G-d of Israel to the attention of the Gentiles. Otherwise, the Gentiles wouldn't care about the Jews good or bad, but as it is, the Gentiles know the story of Moses, of Samson and Delilah, King David, King Solomon, all these JEWISH stories.
Now before you jump on and say, See that means faith in Jesus has brought persecution to the Jews- I will say it first. Yes it has. And welcome to the Chosen People. Chosen People is not what the bigots like to say it is, that Jews believe they are chosen to rule the world. Jews know it is just the opposite. You have referenced that the nation of the Jews is the son of G-d, scourged, pierced and crucified, as it says in Isaiah chapter 53. I agree with you. But there is a parallel, and it isn't easy for Jews to accept. Jesus, come to Judea, was rejected by the Jewish leaders of His day, and was given to the Romans for scourging, piercing and crucifixion. Subsequently, the Jewish people have been rejected by the world (Christians and Moslems, don't want to leave them out, they've done their share), and have been scourged, pierced and crucified, like you say. It is a tremendous leap of faith to see this parallel, but it is spiritual sight which is required, not earthly sight.
Again you are confusing parables with historical events that can be explained by natural events instead of walking on water, the sea periodically parts itself from time to time depending on winds and atmospheric changes. The sun did not stand still in the sky as that was a metaphor but not a parable of events.
Ahhhhh!! Now we come to it. So you believe the miracles of the Bible were natural events? Interesting. And the sun did not stand still in the sky but this was a metaphor but not a parable, you say. Uh huh. There is room here for me to slam you, and I do not wish to do so, but read this, from the Bible you believe in, the Torah, Exodus 14:21, "Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea into dry land, and the waters were divided." Is Exodus the word of G-d or is it an invention of man? It doesn't say the sea parted itself as it does from time to time (how that would allow an entire nation to cross a sea, I don't know), it says The Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind ALL THAT NIGHT. If this verse doesn't mean what it says, then what other verses of the Old Testament also don't mean what they say? Is it written in "invisible flax," or whatever you said about the Gospels? Don't mistake me, I believe in those miracles, but it is on you now to defend your own beliefs, I have defended mine.
