Why Thomas Jefferson Owned a Qur’an

[BS Filter]

Not according to Scripture. Jesus confronted the Pharisees more than any group.
Jesus and the Pharisees (Bible History Online)

I have bad news for you------at that time just about ALL jewish males were literate and they left lots of
writings on REAL HISTORY. Jesus was a Pharisee. Surprising that he left no written record. I wonder
what Constantine et al did with it

What's your REAL HISTORY source that Jesus was a Pharisee? Show me.

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

Jesus rose from the dead, according to Scripture. There were many many witnesses. I believe the Scriptures, not some guy making money by selling books.

 

[irosie91]

I have bad news for you------at that time just about ALL jewish males were literate and they left lots of
writings on REAL HISTORY. Jesus was a Pharisee. Surprising that he left no written record. I wonder
what Constantine et al did with it

What's your REAL HISTORY source that Jesus was a Pharisee? Show me.

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

Jesus rose from the dead, according to Scripture. There were many many witnesses. I believe the Scriptures, not some guy making money by selling books.

you believe the scriptures cobbled together by and for a mass murdering Imperialist war monger. BTW---
are you aware of the fact that the TOMB used to store Jesus' body was the family tomb of a prominent
Jerusalem Pharisee?. The really bad guy in the story is CAIAPHAS-----the person hated by Pharisees
then and EVEN NOW (bet your sunday school teacher fergot to mention that factoid) The new testament
DOES reveal some very important facts of history. Ya gotta know how to read it

 

[BS Filter]

What's your REAL HISTORY source that Jesus was a Pharisee? Show me.

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

Jesus rose from the dead, according to Scripture. There were many many witnesses. I believe the Scriptures, not some guy making money by selling books.

you believe the scriptures cobbled together by and for a mass murdering Imperialist war monger. BTW---
are you aware of the fact that the TOMB used to store Jesus' body was the family tomb of a prominent
Jerusalem Pharisee?. The really bad guy in the story is CAIAPHAS-----the person hated by Pharisees
then and EVEN NOW (bet your sunday school teacher fergot to mention that factoid) The new testament
DOES reveal some very important facts of history. Ya gotta know how to read it

Oh, Rosie. You're such a card.

 

[irosie91]

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

Jesus rose from the dead, according to Scripture. There were many many witnesses. I believe the Scriptures, not some guy making money by selling books.

you believe the scriptures cobbled together by and for a mass murdering Imperialist war monger. BTW---
are you aware of the fact that the TOMB used to store Jesus' body was the family tomb of a prominent
Jerusalem Pharisee?. The really bad guy in the story is CAIAPHAS-----the person hated by Pharisees
then and EVEN NOW (bet your sunday school teacher fergot to mention that factoid) The new testament
DOES reveal some very important facts of history. Ya gotta know how to read it

Oh, Rosie. You're such a card.

feel free to ask questions

 

[hobelim]

Not according to Scripture. Jesus confronted the Pharisees more than any group.
Jesus and the Pharisees (Bible History Online)

I have bad news for you------at that time just about ALL jewish males were literate and they left lots of
writings on REAL HISTORY. Jesus was a Pharisee. Surprising that he left no written record. I wonder
what Constantine et al did with it

What's your REAL HISTORY source that Jesus was a Pharisee? Show me.

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

I read the book way back when too rosie.

The book was specifically about a secret plan for Jesus to survive the crucifixion by drugging him to appear dead only to be revived by his physician friend. Thats why it was called The Passover Plot.

How did you miss that humongous cherry?

 

[irosie91]

I have bad news for you------at that time just about ALL jewish males were literate and they left lots of
writings on REAL HISTORY. Jesus was a Pharisee. Surprising that he left no written record. I wonder
what Constantine et al did with it

What's your REAL HISTORY source that Jesus was a Pharisee? Show me.

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

I read the book way back when too rosie.

The book was specifically about a secret plan for Jesus to survive the crucifixion by drugging him to appear dead only to be revived by his physician friend. Thats why it was called The Passover Plot.

you left out MOST of the book. Maybe you read two pages. Or maybe there is a different book focusing
on that one obscure notion. I consider the discussion of the little theory of "drugging" to be something
like a LOSS LEADER used as an intellectual exercise . THE BOOK ITSELF-----(sans the loss leader)
provides an excellent description of Jesus, Life and Times surrounding the crucifixion-----realistically.
Without that information-----the event actually makes no sense. An important factoid is that Jesus was
IN HIDING. Sunday school does not emphasize that fact. Jesus was ON THE RUN from the ROMAN
ADMINISTRATION (which includes----of course----the hated ------ Sadducean roman shills that occupied the Temple. Your sunday school teacher taught you that Jesus was hanging around Jerusalem freely preaching)----whilst DA JOOOOS WANTED TO KILL HIM----but somehow did not know how (stupid inept jooos) NOPE he was a ROMAN AUTHORITY WANTED MAN--------which is why "JUDAS" had to fink him out. He was in hiding AMONGST PHARISEES. I do not recall a doctor-----but lots of todays doctors-----ARE PHARISEEES. Dr. Maimonides was a Pharisee. I never met a SADDUCEAN DOCTOR.
Who did you imagine was in the "crucify him" cheering squad? --------also those nasty Pharisees?-----
the ones that, very ardently, repudiated execution for anything at all ? (which is why capital punishment
exists in Israel only for CAIAPHAS type characters----the Pharisees never change) In order to read the
NT you do have to know something about Pharisees

 

[hobelim]

What's your REAL HISTORY source that Jesus was a Pharisee? Show me.

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

I read the book way back when too rosie.

The book was specifically about a secret plan for Jesus to survive the crucifixion by drugging him to appear dead only to be revived by his physician friend. Thats why it was called The Passover Plot.

you left out MOST of the book. Maybe you read two pages. Or maybe there is a different book focusing
on that one obscure notion. I consider the discussion of the little theory of "drugging" to be something
like a LOSS LEADER used as an intellectual exercise . THE BOOK ITSELF-----(sans the loss leader)
provides an excellent description of Jesus, Life and Times surrounding the crucifixion-----realistically.
Without that information-----the event actually makes no sense. An important factoid is that Jesus was
IN HIDING. Sunday school does not emphasize that fact. Jesus was ON THE RUN from the ROMAN
ADMINISTRATION (which includes----of course----the hated ------ Sadducean roman shills that occupied the Temple. Your sunday school teacher taught you that Jesus was hanging around Jerusalem freely preaching)----whilst DA JOOOOS WANTED TO KILL HIM----but somehow did not know how (stupid inept jooos) NOPE he was a ROMAN AUTHORITY WANTED MAN--------which is why "JUDAS" had to fink him out. He was in hiding AMONGST PHARISEES. I do not recall a doctor-----but lots of todays doctors-----ARE PHARISEEES. Dr. Maimonides was a Pharisee. I never met a SADDUCEAN DOCTOR.
Who did you imagine was in the "crucify him" cheering squad? --------also those nasty Pharisees?-----
the ones that, very ardently, repudiated execution for anything at all ? (which is why capital punishment
exists in Israel only for CAIAPHAS type characters----the Pharisees never change) In order to read the
NT you do have to know something about Pharisees

According to Schonfield's analysis, the events of the Passover, which are presented in all the Gospels, but inconsistently, are most accurately presented in the Gospel of John. His reading of that Gospel convinced him that John's account, though probably filtered through an assistant and transcription in John's old age, suggests that Jesus had planned everything. Among other things, so that he would not be on the cross for more than a few hours before the Sabbath arrived when it was required by law that Jews be taken down, so that one of his supporters, who was on hand, would give him water (to quench his thirst) that was actually laced with a drug to make him unconscious, and so that Joseph of Arimathea, a well-connected supporter, would collect him off the cross while still alive (but appearing dead) so that he could be secretly nursed back to health.


The Passover Plot - Wikipedia

 

[irosie91]

It's not WIKKI There is a very good book I read long ago------PASSOVER PLOT -----it will help
you to understand the life and times of Jesus-------if the Sunday school teachers have not yet confiscated
all copies

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

I read the book way back when too rosie.

The book was specifically about a secret plan for Jesus to survive the crucifixion by drugging him to appear dead only to be revived by his physician friend. Thats why it was called The Passover Plot.

you left out MOST of the book. Maybe you read two pages. Or maybe there is a different book focusing
on that one obscure notion. I consider the discussion of the little theory of "drugging" to be something
like a LOSS LEADER used as an intellectual exercise . THE BOOK ITSELF-----(sans the loss leader)
provides an excellent description of Jesus, Life and Times surrounding the crucifixion-----realistically.
Without that information-----the event actually makes no sense. An important factoid is that Jesus was
IN HIDING. Sunday school does not emphasize that fact. Jesus was ON THE RUN from the ROMAN
ADMINISTRATION (which includes----of course----the hated ------ Sadducean roman shills that occupied the Temple. Your sunday school teacher taught you that Jesus was hanging around Jerusalem freely preaching)----whilst DA JOOOOS WANTED TO KILL HIM----but somehow did not know how (stupid inept jooos) NOPE he was a ROMAN AUTHORITY WANTED MAN--------which is why "JUDAS" had to fink him out. He was in hiding AMONGST PHARISEES. I do not recall a doctor-----but lots of todays doctors-----ARE PHARISEEES. Dr. Maimonides was a Pharisee. I never met a SADDUCEAN DOCTOR.
Who did you imagine was in the "crucify him" cheering squad? --------also those nasty Pharisees?-----
the ones that, very ardently, repudiated execution for anything at all ? (which is why capital punishment
exists in Israel only for CAIAPHAS type characters----the Pharisees never change) In order to read the
NT you do have to know something about Pharisees

According to Schonfield's analysis, the events of the Passover, which are presented in all the Gospels, but inconsistently, are most accurately presented in the Gospel of John. His reading of that Gospel convinced him that John's account, though probably filtered through an assistant and transcription in John's old age, suggests that Jesus had planned everything. Among other things, so that he would not be on the cross for more than a few hours before the Sabbath arrived when it was required by law that Jews be taken down, so that one of his supporters, who was on hand, would give him water (to quench his thirst) that was actually laced with a drug to make him unconscious, and so that Joseph of Arimathea, a well-connected supporter, would collect him off the cross while still alive (but appearing dead) so that he could be secretly nursed back to health.


The Passover Plot - Wikipedia

yeah------that little "plot" about which the very INFORMATIVE book dances. I did not buy in-----but the
book itself is full of good information. I do not believe that it was a LONG TERM PLAN (or a plan at all)--------it would have had to be (if it had happened that way) something cooked up at the last moment by a desperate bunch of PHARISEES. (nah!) As literature-----the writer had a brilliant DEVICE

 

[BS Filter]

ugh.. The book was a novel, an imaginary exploration of the possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion with the help of his doctor friend....

Jesus most likely was raised in the pharisee tradition but thats exactly what he rejected as a whitewashed tomb....full of corruption and dead mens bones...

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

I read the book way back when too rosie.

The book was specifically about a secret plan for Jesus to survive the crucifixion by drugging him to appear dead only to be revived by his physician friend. Thats why it was called The Passover Plot.

you left out MOST of the book. Maybe you read two pages. Or maybe there is a different book focusing
on that one obscure notion. I consider the discussion of the little theory of "drugging" to be something
like a LOSS LEADER used as an intellectual exercise . THE BOOK ITSELF-----(sans the loss leader)
provides an excellent description of Jesus, Life and Times surrounding the crucifixion-----realistically.
Without that information-----the event actually makes no sense. An important factoid is that Jesus was
IN HIDING. Sunday school does not emphasize that fact. Jesus was ON THE RUN from the ROMAN
ADMINISTRATION (which includes----of course----the hated ------ Sadducean roman shills that occupied the Temple. Your sunday school teacher taught you that Jesus was hanging around Jerusalem freely preaching)----whilst DA JOOOOS WANTED TO KILL HIM----but somehow did not know how (stupid inept jooos) NOPE he was a ROMAN AUTHORITY WANTED MAN--------which is why "JUDAS" had to fink him out. He was in hiding AMONGST PHARISEES. I do not recall a doctor-----but lots of todays doctors-----ARE PHARISEEES. Dr. Maimonides was a Pharisee. I never met a SADDUCEAN DOCTOR.
Who did you imagine was in the "crucify him" cheering squad? --------also those nasty Pharisees?-----
the ones that, very ardently, repudiated execution for anything at all ? (which is why capital punishment
exists in Israel only for CAIAPHAS type characters----the Pharisees never change) In order to read the
NT you do have to know something about Pharisees

According to Schonfield's analysis, the events of the Passover, which are presented in all the Gospels, but inconsistently, are most accurately presented in the Gospel of John. His reading of that Gospel convinced him that John's account, though probably filtered through an assistant and transcription in John's old age, suggests that Jesus had planned everything. Among other things, so that he would not be on the cross for more than a few hours before the Sabbath arrived when it was required by law that Jews be taken down, so that one of his supporters, who was on hand, would give him water (to quench his thirst) that was actually laced with a drug to make him unconscious, and so that Joseph of Arimathea, a well-connected supporter, would collect him off the cross while still alive (but appearing dead) so that he could be secretly nursed back to health.


The Passover Plot - Wikipedia

yeah------that little "plot" about which the very INFORMATIVE book dances. I did not buy in-----but the
book itself is full of good information. I do not believe that it was a LONG TERM PLAN (or a plan at all)--------it would have had to be (if it had happened that way) something cooked up at the last moment by a desperate bunch of PHARISEES. (nah!) As literature-----the writer had a brilliant DEVICE

I read a book that claimed Jesus and Lucifer were brothers and God had a wife. Some guy from New York claiming to be a prophet wrote it.

 

[irosie91]

bull shit-----the book touches on the very remote possibility that Jesus survived the crucifixion------I am not surprised that you CHERRY PICKED that small detail

I read the book way back when too rosie.

The book was specifically about a secret plan for Jesus to survive the crucifixion by drugging him to appear dead only to be revived by his physician friend. Thats why it was called The Passover Plot.

you left out MOST of the book. Maybe you read two pages. Or maybe there is a different book focusing
on that one obscure notion. I consider the discussion of the little theory of "drugging" to be something
like a LOSS LEADER used as an intellectual exercise . THE BOOK ITSELF-----(sans the loss leader)
provides an excellent description of Jesus, Life and Times surrounding the crucifixion-----realistically.
Without that information-----the event actually makes no sense. An important factoid is that Jesus was
IN HIDING. Sunday school does not emphasize that fact. Jesus was ON THE RUN from the ROMAN
ADMINISTRATION (which includes----of course----the hated ------ Sadducean roman shills that occupied the Temple. Your sunday school teacher taught you that Jesus was hanging around Jerusalem freely preaching)----whilst DA JOOOOS WANTED TO KILL HIM----but somehow did not know how (stupid inept jooos) NOPE he was a ROMAN AUTHORITY WANTED MAN--------which is why "JUDAS" had to fink him out. He was in hiding AMONGST PHARISEES. I do not recall a doctor-----but lots of todays doctors-----ARE PHARISEEES. Dr. Maimonides was a Pharisee. I never met a SADDUCEAN DOCTOR.
Who did you imagine was in the "crucify him" cheering squad? --------also those nasty Pharisees?-----
the ones that, very ardently, repudiated execution for anything at all ? (which is why capital punishment
exists in Israel only for CAIAPHAS type characters----the Pharisees never change) In order to read the
NT you do have to know something about Pharisees

According to Schonfield's analysis, the events of the Passover, which are presented in all the Gospels, but inconsistently, are most accurately presented in the Gospel of John. His reading of that Gospel convinced him that John's account, though probably filtered through an assistant and transcription in John's old age, suggests that Jesus had planned everything. Among other things, so that he would not be on the cross for more than a few hours before the Sabbath arrived when it was required by law that Jews be taken down, so that one of his supporters, who was on hand, would give him water (to quench his thirst) that was actually laced with a drug to make him unconscious, and so that Joseph of Arimathea, a well-connected supporter, would collect him off the cross while still alive (but appearing dead) so that he could be secretly nursed back to health.


The Passover Plot - Wikipedia

yeah------that little "plot" about which the very INFORMATIVE book dances. I did not buy in-----but the
book itself is full of good information. I do not believe that it was a LONG TERM PLAN (or a plan at all)--------it would have had to be (if it had happened that way) something cooked up at the last moment by a desperate bunch of PHARISEES. (nah!) As literature-----the writer had a brilliant DEVICE

I read a book that claimed Jesus and Lucifer were brothers and God had a wife. Some guy from New York claiming to be a prophet wrote it.

yeah-----I had a patient who claimed to be KING PEPPER------married to QUEEN SALT

 

[Picaro]

Notice Mohammed is also holding a sword to chop off your head if you don't submit.

No theology is non-violent, and certainly not any in the ME; Peter and some of the other Apostles carried swords, and Peter himself lopped the ear off a city official who came to arrest Jesus. True, some are far more nonviolent than others, and some are death cults that reward followers who kill the most people, like Islam.

The difference is Jesus never used violence or condoned it. Violence is not condoned in the New Testament to spread the Gospel, preaching is. Mohammed condoned and used violence.

There is no forced conversion, true, but that isn't the same as being barred from self-defense or violence at all. They carried swords for a reason, and it wasn't slice bread. the 'Pacifist Hippie Jesus' doesn't exist, either; that is a misinterpretation of several passages taken out of context. Jesus had no problem using violence, as we know from his rampage against the moneylenders fouling the Temple, for one, and his moderation of Peter's act is based on fulfilling prophecy, not a call for pacifism. He certainly knew Peter was carrying the sword in the first place, after all.

LOL Picaro --is that what your Nazi ***** sunday school teacher told you? -----the people who did the
currency exchange in the Temple court yard were "money lenders"??? Did the ***** also say that they
were "Phariseees" I got news----the people who DESPISED THE MONEY CHANGERS IN THE TEMPLE
COURT YARD WERE THE PHARISEES....big news----Jesus was doing the Pharisee thing and for that he was crucified, You are a willing cosmic DUPE

Not according to Scripture. Jesus confronted the Pharisees more than any group.
Jesus and the Pharisees (Bible History Online)

You can ignore Rosie; she didn't address anything I actually said, never does, she just throws out rants her racist bigot Orthodox Rabbies types fed her as a kid. She doesn't have the first clue what she's rambling about, she just likes the fiction that Constantine ran around writing up entire books of the New Testament and other stupid New Age stoner trash.

 

[Picaro]

Notice Mohammed is also holding a sword to chop off your head if you don't submit.

No theology is non-violent, and certainly not any in the ME; Peter and some of the other Apostles carried swords, and Peter himself lopped the ear off a city official who came to arrest Jesus. True, some are far more nonviolent than others, and some are death cults that reward followers who kill the most people, like Islam.

The difference is Jesus never used violence or condoned it. Violence is not condoned in the New Testament to spread the Gospel, preaching is. Mohammed condoned and used violence.

There is no forced conversion, true, but that isn't the same as being barred from self-defense or violence at all. They carried swords for a reason, and it wasn't slice bread. the 'Pacifist Hippie Jesus' doesn't exist, either; that is a misinterpretation of several passages taken out of context. Jesus had no problem using violence, as we know from his rampage against the moneylenders fouling the Temple, for one, and his moderation of Peter's act is based on fulfilling prophecy, not a call for pacifism. He certainly knew Peter was carrying the sword in the first place, after all.

LOL Picaro --is that what your Nazi ***** sunday school teacher told you? -----the people who did the
currency exchange in the Temple court yard were "money lenders"??? Did the ***** also say that they
were "Phariseees" I got news----the people who DESPISED THE MONEY CHANGERS IN THE TEMPLE
COURT YARD WERE THE PHARISEES....big news----Jesus was doing the Pharisee thing and for that he was crucified, You are a willing cosmic DUPE

Not according to Scripture. Jesus confronted the Pharisees more than any group.
Jesus and the Pharisees (Bible History Online)

It should also be noted some Pharisees were converts; based on his writing, it is highly likely John was a Pharisee, and we know Paul was for sure. Nothing in the NT says they were all opposed to Jesus, though obviously some of those appointed as judges and Temple officials certainly were.

 

[irosie91]

No theology is non-violent, and certainly not any in the ME; Peter and some of the other Apostles carried swords, and Peter himself lopped the ear off a city official who came to arrest Jesus. True, some are far more nonviolent than others, and some are death cults that reward followers who kill the most people, like Islam.

The difference is Jesus never used violence or condoned it. Violence is not condoned in the New Testament to spread the Gospel, preaching is. Mohammed condoned and used violence.

There is no forced conversion, true, but that isn't the same as being barred from self-defense or violence at all. They carried swords for a reason, and it wasn't slice bread. the 'Pacifist Hippie Jesus' doesn't exist, either; that is a misinterpretation of several passages taken out of context. Jesus had no problem using violence, as we know from his rampage against the moneylenders fouling the Temple, for one, and his moderation of Peter's act is based on fulfilling prophecy, not a call for pacifism. He certainly knew Peter was carrying the sword in the first place, after all.

LOL Picaro --is that what your Nazi ***** sunday school teacher told you? -----the people who did the
currency exchange in the Temple court yard were "money lenders"??? Did the ***** also say that they
were "Phariseees" I got news----the people who DESPISED THE MONEY CHANGERS IN THE TEMPLE
COURT YARD WERE THE PHARISEES....big news----Jesus was doing the Pharisee thing and for that he was crucified, You are a willing cosmic DUPE

Not according to Scripture. Jesus confronted the Pharisees more than any group.
Jesus and the Pharisees (Bible History Online)

You can ignore Rosie; she didn't address anything I actually said, never does, she just throws out rants her racist bigot Orthodox Rabbies types fed her as a kid. She doesn't have the first clue what she's rambling about, she just likes the fiction that Constantine ran around writing up entire books of the New Testament and other stupid New Age stoner trash.

Picaro is kinda bitter-----and IMAGINATIVE. Interestingly, as a kid I attended protestant SUNDAY SCHOOL------a lot more than I ventured into a synagogue------had NO CONTACT at all with Orthodox
jews and did not even attend the 'after school "Hebrew school" where jewish kids go for a few hours
per week to learn the Hebrew alphabet. Other than protestant sunday school where I colored line cartoons of jesus holding a lamb------I had NO "religious" education in my childhood at all. My education in the
NEW TESTAMENT-----did begin in childhood-------I was an avid reader and there were copies of the
NEW TESTAMENT freely available to me-------old ladies handed them out during the Christmas season.
There was no copy of the OT in my parents house when I was a kid--------they are freely available in
hotel nite-tables for anyone interested. Since I am not stupid----the term "ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE"
has important meaning--------just as "ACCORDING TO THE BAGHAVAD GITA" and "ACCORDING
TO THE ILLIAD AND ODYSSEY" has meaning. ---<<< see? I was an avid reader and learned EARLY
ON to be a critical reader

 

[irosie91]

Notice Mohammed is also holding a sword to chop off your head if you don't submit.

No theology is non-violent, and certainly not any in the ME; Peter and some of the other Apostles carried swords, and Peter himself lopped the ear off a city official who came to arrest Jesus. True, some are far more nonviolent than others, and some are death cults that reward followers who kill the most people, like Islam.

The difference is Jesus never used violence or condoned it. Violence is not condoned in the New Testament to spread the Gospel, preaching is. Mohammed condoned and used violence.

There is no forced conversion, true, but that isn't the same as being barred from self-defense or violence at all. They carried swords for a reason, and it wasn't slice bread. the 'Pacifist Hippie Jesus' doesn't exist, either; that is a misinterpretation of several passages taken out of context. Jesus had no problem using violence, as we know from his rampage against the moneylenders fouling the Temple, for one, and his moderation of Peter's act is based on fulfilling prophecy, not a call for pacifism. He certainly knew Peter was carrying the sword in the first place, after all.

LOL Picaro --is that what your Nazi ***** sunday school teacher told you? -----the people who did the
currency exchange in the Temple court yard were "money lenders"??? Did the ***** also say that they
were "Phariseees" I got news----the people who DESPISED THE MONEY CHANGERS IN THE TEMPLE
COURT YARD WERE THE PHARISEES....big news----Jesus was doing the Pharisee thing and for that he was crucified, You are a willing cosmic DUPE

Not according to Scripture. Jesus confronted the Pharisees more than any group.
Jesus and the Pharisees (Bible History Online)

The romans----the ones who compiled the NT-----hated the Pharisees because LIKE JESUS----
the PHARISEES were intensely ANTI-ROMAN. The Pharisees were to the Romans---something
like the IRGUN was to England

 

[irosie91]

No theology is non-violent, and certainly not any in the ME; Peter and some of the other Apostles carried swords, and Peter himself lopped the ear off a city official who came to arrest Jesus. True, some are far more nonviolent than others, and some are death cults that reward followers who kill the most people, like Islam.

The difference is Jesus never used violence or condoned it. Violence is not condoned in the New Testament to spread the Gospel, preaching is. Mohammed condoned and used violence.

There is no forced conversion, true, but that isn't the same as being barred from self-defense or violence at all. They carried swords for a reason, and it wasn't slice bread. the 'Pacifist Hippie Jesus' doesn't exist, either; that is a misinterpretation of several passages taken out of context. Jesus had no problem using violence, as we know from his rampage against the moneylenders fouling the Temple, for one, and his moderation of Peter's act is based on fulfilling prophecy, not a call for pacifism. He certainly knew Peter was carrying the sword in the first place, after all.

LOL Picaro --is that what your Nazi ***** sunday school teacher told you? -----the people who did the
currency exchange in the Temple court yard were "money lenders"??? Did the ***** also say that they
were "Phariseees" I got news----the people who DESPISED THE MONEY CHANGERS IN THE TEMPLE
COURT YARD WERE THE PHARISEES....big news----Jesus was doing the Pharisee thing and for that he was crucified, You are a willing cosmic DUPE

Not according to Scripture. Jesus confronted the Pharisees more than any group.
Jesus and the Pharisees (Bible History Online)

It should also be noted some Pharisees were converts; based on his writing, it is highly likely John was a Pharisee, and we know Paul was for sure. Nothing in the NT says they were all opposed to Jesus, though obviously some of those appointed as judges and Temple officials certainly were.

more interesting news-----the ROMAN APPOINTED JUDGES and TEMPLE OFFICIALS at that time
were mostly SADDUCEES------not Pharisees. Even Herod the king was a ROMAN APPOINTEE----
He was an edomite and considered by jews to be ineligible to be King. The person who was with little
doubt a PHARISEE was JOHN THE BAPTIST-----the person Herod killed to the delight of his roman
sponsors The John of "the book of revulsions" is an unknown. John was a very very common
name at that time and in its various permutations -----still is amongst jews. Josephus Flavius was also
a Pharisee. Paul was the child of greek converts----and ALSO grew up in a very HELLENIZED
community

 

[Issa]

Here's why he had a Koran.

First Barbary War - Wikipedia

That led to a treaty between Morocco and the US and Morocco was the first country to actually recognize the independence of the young USA. Then the Moroccan Sultan allowed american ships into Moroccan Ports of Larach, Mogador, and Sale. Later on during civil war The Moroccan king issued an order to seize all american ships with confederate flags (love that part).
On a side note lot of Black Muslims consider themselves moors and some even fly Moroccan flag and consider the king of Morocco their leader. Strange but true.

 

[irosie91]

Here's why he had a Koran.

First Barbary War - Wikipedia

That led to a treaty between Morocco and the US and Morocco was the first country to actually recognize the independence of the young USA. Then the Moroccan Sultan allowed american ships into Moroccan Ports of Larach, Mogador, and Sale. Later on during civil war The Moroccan king issued an order to seize all american ships with confederate flags (love that part).
On a side note lot of Black Muslims consider themselves moors and some even fly Moroccan flag and consider the king of Morocco their leader. Strange but true.

are you making a point?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Not Adulterating Obvious Intentions "

* Vices Versus Virtues *

Sunni Man, I'd like to purchase a nice illuminated Qu'ran. Best suggestion?

My recommendation is the saheeh international translation , as it is most clear from among other translations .

Note however , part of my purpose in trying usmb was promulgated by a failure of the previous forum to restrain their moderators from censuring my well found hostilities towards fictional ishmaelism .

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

" Not Adulterating Obvious Intentions "

* Vices Versus Virtues *

Sunni Man, I'd like to purchase a nice illuminated Qu'ran. Best suggestion?

My recommendation is the saheeh international translation , as it is most clear from among other translations .

Note however , part of my purpose in trying usmb was promulgated by a failure of the previous forum to restrain their moderators from censuring my well found hostilities towards fictional ishmaelism .

I collect rare books and art. I'm not interested so much in translation as I am in the artistic and collector's value of a nice hand copy.

 

[ding]

" Not Adulterating Obvious Intentions "

* Vices Versus Virtues *

Sunni Man, I'd like to purchase a nice illuminated Qu'ran. Best suggestion?

My recommendation is the saheeh international translation , as it is most clear from among other translations .

Note however , part of my purpose in trying usmb was promulgated by a failure of the previous forum to restrain their moderators from censuring my well found hostilities towards fictional ishmaelism .

Why are your hostilities to "fictional" ishmaelism well founded?

Why do you believe that qurayshism outside of hejaz is debase?

Why do you call qurayshism outside of hejaz "fictional ishmaelism?"