Zone1 Hebrews 1:8 says Jesus is God

[HaShev]

Image of a man...Ironically this image was given breath and a life in the pages of a book.. No different then idol worshipping an image made of stone or wood or anything under heaven...

2 people had such a diverse library and interest in multiculture's mythologies and faiths, that could have compiled that image and that was Appollonias of Tyana (also from Tarsus and called Pol) and Constantine who had Eusebius plagiarize and forge texts. The only smoking gun of which one most likely created the image is the fact the newer texts after Constantine had changed, including Josephus writings.
The forgeries are in the Eusebius era, but it's possible Pol=Paul who wrote 3/4 the initial stories that plagiarized Baal, Mithra, and Zoroastrian myths and tablets along with OT plagiarism and stolen roles given to the image's character.

 

[shimon]

2 people had such a diverse library and interest in multiculture's mythologies and faiths, that could have compiled that image and that was Appollonias of Tyana (also from Tarsus and called Pol) and Constantine who had Eusebius plagiarize and forge texts. The only smoking gun of which one most likely created the image is the fact the newer texts after Constantine had changed, including Josephus writings.
The forgeries are in the Eusebius era, but it's possible Pol=Paul who wrote 3/4 the initial stories that plagiarized Baal, Mithra, and Zoroastrian myths and tablets along with OT plagiarism and stolen roles given to the image's character.

It is Ironically the Hebrew Scriptures ( the Old Testament in layman’s terms ) that was compared poetically to a tree of life) The ones who compiled or created the image of this so called man created their own tree of death…Which is opposite of theteachings in the Old Testament…Trees bear fruit… Fruit aresymbolically teachings and you shall know them (whoever teaches these things) by the fruit they bear…In Hebrew understandings 18 represents life or Gd so to find this created image in hebrews1:8 in the New Testament claiming this image is G- d shows either this was done purposely and deceptively on their part or this was a tell that all liars and deceivers get caught in …. I would lean on the fact that the creators of the New Testament were told to place their image of a man (the idol of Isaiah 44 ) in places to strengthen their false claims about him/ it…The Romans had many different faiths and peoples in their empire so to appeal to all of them this created image of a man was indeed borrowed from all the ideals from before such as the Baal, Mithra and Zoarastrains that way they can keep power and control and the people enslaved to their system…I liken this to going out to a bar and ordering a beer and paying your good hard earned money but receiving lemon aid with a touch of alcohol in it… Sure you might get a small kick but it will soon wear off in a very short time and you didn’t get what you were promised and were conned by this watered down version…After all CON stantine knew a good CON when he saw it in his dream or vision to say the least and the apple( Pol or Appolonious of Tyanus) doesn’t fall far from the tree) Wink Wink nudge nudge…Sometimes people need to drink Mikes Hard Lemonaide even though it is a bitter alternative so they can finally see the TREE from the forest that was blocking their view of the way things truly are….

 

[ding]

the OT tells you there would be 2 messiahs and not to follow the fallen first one, so what did you do, you followed the first one hindering the Shiloh (rightful one).

So you are saying Jesus existed.

 

[PeterPilot]

And, his proof has just been proved true.

In the mind of the indoctrinated, yes.

 

[ding]

In the mind of the indoctrinated, yes.

How so?

 

[Cougarbear]

In the mind of the indoctrinated, yes.

You use the word indoctrinated as a bad word. If one freely chooses “A” by reading, studying, meditating and praying on their own about each topic in the doctrine of “A” then is it bad? However, if someone is forced to choose “A” by forced attendance, constant either attacking or supporting “A” until compliance to “A” is completed that is bad, right? But, if a child must attend Church because everyone in the family is going and the child can’t be left alone, that isn’t the same. It’s okay to go to school as long as the teachers aren’t forcing by threats to follow the teacher. Give information and let the person choose.

 

[HaShev]

So you are saying Jesus existed.

no, once again, the first messiah is an image of a man representing the son of Baal, made in likeness to every cultures beliefs so that Rome could be the authority snd benefactor via collecting taxes (TITHES) to their deities which were never historical men either. Are you saying Baal existed and his father Dagon existed?

 

[ding]

no, once again, the first messiah is an image of a man representing the son of Baal, made in likeness to every cultures beliefs so that Rome could be the authority snd benefactor via collecting taxes (TITHES) to their deities which were never historical men either. Are you saying Baal existed and his father Dagon existed?

You are literally attributing it to Jesus. It would make no sense to attribute it to Jesus if Jesus didn’t exist.

 

[HaShev]

You are literally attributing it to Jesus. It would make no sense to attribute it to Jesus if Jesus didn’t exist.

You are not making any sense, what is "it" in your reference. Notice that by creating his image through using some real figures they have even you confused in the way you discuss that image. People do that with God as well, as soon as they anthropromorphize God they use terms & tenses and arguments that make no sense and therefore change the precepts.
Stick to the rules, if you are gonna discuss a historical figure then use his historical name and "only'" his historical accounts not his borrowed from other figures not his plagiarized myths of other cultures, not his own self testimony ( because the messengers of the image claim that self testimony is invalid, making the NT pats on the back invalid.
conclusion: once you discuss only the historical figures each single one of them fail to satisfy prophecy, fail to liberate their people, fail to bring you to Torah's ethos, fail to be a good shepherd, just failed all around and even the NT said that about the christs they were writing about, but Constantine removed some of those verses like in Luke where he denied his christ was the one they'd hoped him to be. Luke sounded to much like doubting Thomas so that portion was removed.
If it's devine why need a lie and coverup and a changed name to confuse which character they are referring to?

 

[ding]

You are not making any sense, what is "it" in your reference. Notice that by creating his image through using some real figures they have even you confused in the way you discuss that image. People do that with God as well, as soon as they anthropromorphize God they use terms & tenses and arguments that make no sense and therefore change the precepts.
Stick to the rules, if you are gonna discuss a historical figure then use his historical name and "only'" his historical accounts not his borrowed from other figures not his plagiarized myths of other cultures, not his own self testimony ( because the messengers of the image claim that self testimony is invalid, making the NT pats on the back invalid.
conclusion: once you discuss only the historical figures each single one of them fail to satisfy prophecy, fail to liberate their people, fail to bring you to Torah's ethos, fail to be a good shepherd, just failed all around and even the NT said that about the christs they were writing about, but Constantine removed some of those verses like in Luke where he denied his christ was the one they'd hoped him to be. Luke sounded to much like doubting Thomas so that portion was removed.
If it's devine why need a lie and coverup and a changed name to confuse which character they are referring to?

I am making sense. You argue who Jesus is by referencing the OT. If Jesus never existed as you say, you wouldn’t be doing that. Now do you understand?

 

[ding]

People do that with God as well, as soon as they anthropromorphize God they use terms & tenses and arguments that make no sense and therefore change the precepts.

According to Maimonides, "If you remove all anthropomorphic content from your conception of God: you remove all content of any kind. In the end, you are left with a God whose essence is unknowable and indescribable. Of what possible value is such a conception either to philosophy or religion?"

Jesus, who existed in reality, is the ultimate expression of that and is of ultimate value to humanity.

 

[ding]

the OT tells you there would be 2 messiahs

And it sounds like you are saying Jesus was one of them.

 

[HaShev]

And it sounds like you are saying Jesus was one of them.

yes the fallen false imposter messiah aka the first messiah ben joseph, did you fail to learn sequences the first messiah can not come back to overturn the first messiah as the rightful messiah. The first messiah can not be the second Messiah.
The fallen messiah can not be the only messiah unless you are rooting for Lucifer.
Which you are:
[See Lucifer here etymology of "": "[ the morning star, a fallen rebel archangel, THE Devil, fr. OE. fr. Latin, the morning star, fr. Lucifer light-bearing, fr. luc light + -fer -ferous--more at LIGHT]" (Webster's, p.677)

-Rev 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify these things in the churches.
I am the bright and Morning Star (lucifer)

Notice you never answered any of my questions in your 3 replies?
Truth can answer questions, a lie has to avoid and smokescreen.

Let's try this analogy:
Kramer is a fictional character, he is an image of a man created in scripts.
Kramer is based a little bit on an actual character the writer knew but also bits of stories from others they knew of.
Kramer is a new name given the character who's image is based on many people and fictional scenerios. Kramer is not real, the parts of historical Kramer is not even named Kramer. =Kramer is a fictional character played by Michael Richards.
Jesus is played by Rome, intellectual honesty would be to seek who wrote the script play, some say it was the writings of Q, some say a wicked woman, was the woman the source of Q, was Appolonias of Tyana the author? How much did Eusebius write? All questions you never answer because you assumed your Kramer was real. Because the hinderer adversary said he was so you would not revolt against it's taxes disguised as offerings to your Kramer.

 

[PeterPilot]

You use the word indoctrinated as a bad word. If one freely chooses “A” by reading, studying, meditating and praying on their own about each topic in the doctrine of “A” then is it bad? However, if someone is forced to choose “A” by forced attendance, constant either attacking or supporting “A” until compliance to “A” is completed that is bad, right? But, if a child must attend Church because everyone in the family is going and the child can’t be left alone, that isn’t the same. It’s okay to go to school as long as the teachers aren’t forcing by threats to follow the teacher. Give information and let the person choose.

Yes, 'indoctrinated' and 'brainwashed' have negative connotations, for sure. Nonetheless such conditioning, whether voluntary or forced, has a great effect on the young human and is a large factor as to how that young human will think and behave as it becomes an adult.

 

[ding]

yes the fallen false imposter messiah aka the first messiah ben joseph, did you fail to learn sequences the first messiah can not come back to overturn the first messiah as the rightful messiah. The first messiah can not be the second Messiah.
The fallen messiah can not be the only messiah unless you are rooting for Lucifer.
Which you are:
[See Lucifer here etymology of "": "[ the morning star, a fallen rebel archangel, THE Devil, fr. OE. fr. Latin, the morning star, fr. Lucifer light-bearing, fr. luc light + -fer -ferous--more at LIGHT]" (Webster's, p.677)

-Rev 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify these things in the churches.
I am the bright and Morning Star (lucifer)

Notice you never answered any of my questions in your 3 replies?
Truth can answer questions, a lie has to avoid and smokescreen.

Let's try this analogy:
Kramer is a fictional character, he is an image of a man created in scripts.
Kramer is based a little bit on an actual character the writer knew but also bits of stories from others they knew of.
Kramer is a new name given the character who's image is based on many people and fictional scenerios. Kramer is not real, the parts of historical Kramer is not even named Kramer. =Kramer is a fictional character played by Michael Richards.
Jesus is played by Rome, intellectual honesty would be to seek who wrote the script play, some say it was the writings of Q, some say a wicked woman, was the woman the source of Q, was Appolonias of Tyana the author? How much did Eusebius write? All questions you never answer because you assumed your Kramer was real. Because the hinderer adversary said he was so you would not revolt against it's taxes disguised as offerings to your Kramer.
View attachment 1149526

Congratulations on accepting Jesus existed.

 

[ding]

Yes, 'indoctrinated' and 'brainwashed' have negative connotations, for sure. Nonetheless such conditioning, whether voluntary or forced, has a great effect on the young human and is a large factor as to how that young human will think and behave as it becomes an adult.

But you broke through your indoctrination and brainwashing, right?

 

[HaShev]

Congratulations on accepting Jesus existed.

so you believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny then?
Or are they images that exist?

 

[Cougarbear]

Yes, 'indoctrinated' and 'brainwashed' have negative connotations, for sure. Nonetheless such conditioning, whether voluntary or forced, has a great effect on the young human and is a large factor as to how that young human will think and behave as it becomes an adult.

And, that is the job and the right of parents to teach their children according to their beliefs. We hope that what is being taught is good and beneficial to our society in the U.S.

 

[ding]

so you believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny then?
Or are they images that exist?
View attachment 1149828

That’s the level of intellect I have come to expect from you.

 

[HaShev]

That’s the level of intellect I have come to expect from you.

says the man who believes in Santa, the Ishtar bunny and Cosmo Kramer.