Was Jesus a Jew?
Stan Dandeliver
who the Jews are religiously and racially, and provide evidence
that Jesus Christ was not a Jew.
Was Jesus Christ a Jew by Religion?
The answer is clearly "NO". Jesus had the true religion of the Old
Testament, found in the Law and the prophets; and He constantly rebuked
the Jews for having abandoned this for Judaism under the Babylonian
Talmud (which in His day was called "The Tradition of the Elders"). In
Matthew 5:17-18 He said "Think not that I come to destroy the Law or the
prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill; for verily I say
unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no
wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled".
Jesus constantly rebuked the Jews for their apostasy, for setting aside
the Laws of God in favor of The Tradition of the Elders. This Talmudic
Judaism was very different from the religion which we find in the Old
Testament. The late Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Chief Rabbi of the United
States, said "The return from Babylon, and the adoption of the
Babylonian Talmud, marks the end of Hebrewism, and the beginning of
Judaism". Since the true religion of the Old Testament was the religion
of the real Hebrews (not Jews), the learned Rabbi was quite right in
calling it "Hebrewism" and noting that it came to its end when the
Talmud was adopted; and that this was the beginning of a new religion -
Judaism (or Babylonianism).
Was Jesus Christ a Jew by Race?
To answer this, we must trace the racial ancestry of both Jesus and the
Jews. Jesus Christ was a pure-blooded member of the Tribe of Judah -
and no true Judahite was a Jew by race, as we shall see. Jesus' ancestry
is given in both Matthew 1 and Luke 3. Both of them show that He was a
descendant of the Patriarch Judah, through one of his twin sons, Pharez;
by His mother Mary, He came through the line of David, and Nathan, the
brother of Solomon, as traced in the third chapter of Luke. Jesus Christ
was therefore a pure-blooded Israelite, of the Tribe of Judah, as Paul
says in Romans 9:4-5.
Now let us trace the racial descent of the Jews. First we must note that
the Jews were not - and are not - Israelites. Yes, I know that you have
been taught that "Jew" and "Israelite" were the same thing; but no
greater lie was ever taught, as we shall see. Let us get the first proof
of this from Jesus Christ Himself. He stated plainly in Matthew 15:24:
"I am not sent but unto the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel".
Therefore, He was sent to those who were of Israel - but not to others.
Accordingly, when He sent His twelve disciples out to preach His gospel,
Matthew 10:5-6 records that He told them this: Go not into the way of
the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go
rather to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel". And He added: "Ye
shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man be
come" (Matthew 10:23). They could have gone over all the cities of Judea
in a month; so it was obvious that the cities of Israel, to which He
referred, were the cities of the so-called Lost Tribes who had already
entered Europe in their long migration. But take careful note of Jesus
Christ's own words:" "I am not sent but unto the Lost Sheep of the House
of Israel". If the Jews were any part of Israel, then they would have
been some of His sheep; but He says that they are not.
In the 10th chapter of John, Jesus says: "I am the good shepherd, and
know my sheep, and am known of mine". But He tells the Jews - and it
says "Jews" - "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I
said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow
me". Note carefully those words. He does not say that the reason that
the Jews are not His sheep is that they don't believe, and that they
could become His sheep just by changing their minds. To the contrary, He
says that the reason they don't believe is that they are not of His
sheep. He knows His sheep, and knows that the Jews are not of His sheep.
Now that we know the Jews are not any part of any Tribe of Israel, let's
find out who the Jews are. Let's trace their ancestry. We find that the
true line of His people must be kept free from mongrelization with the
neighboring Canaanites. Accordingly, Genesis 24:3-4 records that
Abraham, took great pains to see that his son, Isaac, should marry only
a woman of his own people. Likewise, Genesis 27:46 through 28:1 records
that Isaac also required that his son, Jacob (the father of the
Israelites) should also marry only within his own race line. This law
had been obeyed for several centuries, to keep the race line pure. But
one of the sons of Israel, the patriarch Judah, father of the Tribe of
Judah, violated it by marrying a Canaanite woman, who bore him three
sons, of whom only one, Shelah, survived and left descendants (see
Genesis 38:1-5). This half-breed , mongrel line must be distinguished
from Judah's pure-blooded descendants by his twin sons Pharez and Zarah.
Judah fathered Pharez and Zarah by his daughter-in-law Tamar. Although
born out of wedlock, they were of pure Israel stock on both sides, and
from one of them, Pharez, Jesus Christ was descended. The descendants of
these twins are the real Tribe of Judah.
The half-breed son, Shelah, accompanied Judah into Egypt, and in the
following centuries left many descendants. They were in the Exodus, and
accompanied the armies of Israel into the promised land (see Genesis
46:12 and Numbers 26:20). However, they bred true to type; they were
half-breed Canaanites, lacking the spiritual insight which God gave to
His own people, so they remained idolators, Baal-worshippers. In I
Chronicles 4:21, you will find them referred to as "the House of
Ashbea". "Ashbea" is a corruption of "Ish-baal" or "man of Baal" and
shows that they were still idolators, unable to perceive the God of
Israel. So these Shelanites, half-breeds, formed one of the peoples of
the land, who made up the Jews in the time of Jesus Christ.
Another alien racial group who became part of the Jews were the "mixed
multitude" which Exodus 12:38 says left Egypt along with the children of
Israel. The Hebrew word here translated "mixed" is the word "EREB",
meaning half-breed or mongrel. During the two centuries in Egypt, many
had violated the divine law against race-mixing, and these were the
result. On the Exodus, when the going became hard in the wilderness, the
Bible records that this "mixed multitude" made a lot of trouble, and led
some of the Israelites into rebellion (see Numbers 11:4-6). This
mongrelized group was still in the land after the return from the
Babylonian captivity; for we find them listed in Nehemiah 13:3 as still
in the land, and still a source of trouble. They also were among the
Jews in Christ's time.
Then there were the various Canaanite peoples who were still in the
land, chief of whom were the Jebusites, the Hittites, the Hivites, the
Perizzites, and the Amorites. When the Israelites were trying to enter
the Promised Land, God gave them specific instructions to completely
drive out or exterminate all of these Canaanites, saying: "When the Lord
thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it,
and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the
Gergashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites,
and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations mightier and greater
than thou; and when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee:
thou shalt smite them and utterly destroy them; nor show any mercy unto
them … But of the cities of these people which the Lord thy God doth
give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that
breatheth; but thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites,
and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and
the Jebusites, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee" (See Numbers
33:50-56; Deuteronomy 7:1-6; 20:16-18).
And there were the Edomites. You will remember that Esau and Jacob were
twin brothers; but Esau was a man of such low character that we have
God's own testimony in MalachI 1:2-3: "Was not Esau Jacob's brother?
Saith the Lord. Yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau". Jacob kept the
race-line pure, and God changed his name to Israel and made him the
father of God's own chosen people, Israel. But Esau married two
Canaanite wives and one Ishmaelite wife, and left only half-breed,
mongrel children (see Genesis 26:34-35; 27:46; and 36:2). As his mongrel
descendants could not marry into the true Semitic line, he moved out
from among them, and went down to Mount Seir, the rugged range of
mountains south-east of the Dead Sea, and this land was called "Edom"
(or occasionally by the Grecianized form of the word "Idumea");
thereafter, his descendants were called "Edomites" (see Genesis 33:16
and Genesis 36:1-9).
There they had a long and troublesome history. Esau's grandson was
Amalek, father of the Tribe of Amalek, who were such an evil lot that,
in Exodus 17:14-16, God said that He would have perpetual war with
Amalek until they were all destroyed. The Edomites constantly harassed
the southern portion of Israel until King Saul beat them off, about 1087
B.C. But Saul disobeyed God's command to exterminate them, and for this
disobedience, God deposed him as king, in favor of David (see I Samuel
15:1-26). But even David didn't exterminate them, and there was a long
history of wars between Edom and Israel (later with Judah).
You will find it in II Kings, chapters 8 and 14, and II Chronicles,
chapters 20 and 25. The whole book of Obadiah is devoted to God's
condemnation of Edom's treacherous attack upon the Kingdom of Judah when
Judah was being conquered by Babylon.
During the Babylonian captivity of Judah, the land lay practically
empty; and during this period, the people of Edom, partly from
opportunity and partly from pressure against them from the east, moved
into the vacant southern half of the Kingdom of Judah (see article
"Edom" in Funk & Wagnall's New Standard Bible Dictionary, pages 198-199,
and Scribner's Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. 1, pages 644-646. From this
new area, they continued to harass the little nation which returned from
Babylon. By about 142 B.C., the returned exiles of Judah won complete
independence under the Maccabean line of Kings; and about 120 B.C., John
Hyrcanus, one of the Maccabean kings, conquered the Edomites. He too,
instead of exterminating them, took them into his kingdom, offering
them full citizenship if they would give up their paganism and adopt the
religion of Judaism. This they did, and from 120 B.C. they were full
citizens of the kingdom (see Josephus, "Antiquities of the Jews", Book
13, Chapter 9. And see also The Jewish Encyclopedia, article "Edom",
Vol. V, page 41).
By 69 B.C., incompetent leadership and intrigue within the Maccabean
monarchy, together with the rising power of Rome in western Asia, gave
opportunity to Antipater (also called Antipas), an Edomite chieftain,
founder of the Herodian family, to rise to power. By bribery, boldness,
and military skill, he gained the favor of Rome, and the Romans made him
Procurator (Governor) of Judea. His son, Herod I, beginning as Governor
of Galilee, used the same methods to secure appointment as King of Judea
in 40 B.C., and by 37 B.C. he gained complete control of Judea. He
maintained himself in power by extreme ruthlessness and bribery, for
which he taxed the people very heavily. This is the same Herod who had
all the little male children in Bethlehem murdered, trying to murder
Jesus Christ.
His son Herod Archelaus, held the Governorship (the Romans didn't trust
him with the crown) for ten years of astonishingly evil misrule, from 4
B.C. to 6 A.D., after which the Romans convicted him of crimes and
removed him; and thereafter Judea was governed by Roman Procurators (of
whom Pontius Pilate was No. 6). Nevertheless, the Romans left
practically complete power of local government in the hands of the
Herodian Edomites, who had complete control of the Temple and power to
enforce all their local laws. (Remember how Pontius Pilate tried to get
out of condemning Jesus Christ, telling the Jews: "Take YE Him and judge
Him according to YOUR law" (John 18:31).
The Edomite Jews could say that Abraham was an ancestor of theirs,
through Esau, as they did in John 8:33; but this Hebrew blood through
Esau had been diluted to the vanishing point by 1700 years of marrying
only people of Canaanite racial stocks. Therefore, Jesus Christ rebuked
them for falsely claiming to be still of Abrahamic (therefore
inferentially of Israelite) lineage, for He told them in John 8:44 "Ye
are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.
He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth,
because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of
his own: for he is a liar and the father of it".
By carefully observing the 8th chapter of John, verses 31-47, we learn
the following: These were Jews to whom Jesus was speaking, and the Bible
identifies them as Jews. And in the Jewish Encyclopedia, the article on
Edom concludes with the words "The Edomites today are found in modern
oz
Third Reich (Nazi Germany)
Unworthy of comment
this sort of rubbish ends up in the filth of Holocaust denial and calls
for a new pogrom
Christians beware - this filth is not Christian
Stan Dandeliver
Jewry.
Stan Dandeliver
Ridiculous! How can it be "anti-Semitic" when Jews aren't
even Semitic?
And the "Holocaust"? Please! You're embarrassing yourself!
The lies about the Holohoax have been exposed! Even the Jew,
Norman Finkelstein, wrote a book called "The Holocaust Industry"
exposing how the lies have provided the Jews a useful tool in
extorting money from White European countries while keeping
the goyim feeling guilty for something that never happened.
And, evidently, you have believed the lies of the Jews for
so long, you're obviously incapable of seeing the truth.
In reading the original post, please feel free to
point out where I'm wrong. Good luck!
Give no heed to Jewish fables. (Titus 1:14)
Rob
Where is modern Jewry found? And how does a Jew prove they're a Jew?
Rob
JCarew
"Rob" <R...@nospam.com> wrote in message >
>snip<
>Where is modern Jewry found? And how does
>a Jew prove they're a Jew?
To be considered Jewish you have to be born
of a Jewish mother unless your a convert to
Judaism, therefore children born of a gentile
woman who converts to Judaism before the
birth of her children are considered Jewish.
Race has nothing to do with it, it all depends
on whether the mother is Jewish or not. Except
in the case of Reform Judaism which has
discarded the "Jewish mother" fixation and has
(quite rationally) maintained that any child who
has at least one Jewish parent and is raised
in the Jewish tradition is a Jew, regardless
of the gender of the Jewish parent. Because
of this recognition of paternal involvement
in childrearing (as well as other modern
understandings), Reform Jews have been slammed
as "not real Jews" by the Orthodox.
Jim Carew sfo
Stan Dandeliver
> Where is modern Jewry found?
Who Are The Jews?
by Dr. Wesley A. Swift
It is frightening today to see many preachers have gone all out for the
Jews, especially since their success was so skillfully engineered in
Palestine, but you must remember that they do not change their identity,
their way of life, or, their method of living. Also remember that
nothing had changed as to what Jesus had to say about them as He
identified them when He walked the earth and in His ministry called the
Jews the children of the devil. He doesn't now turn around here in our
time and call them the children of God and "the chosen people", as so
many Christians are doing today! The Jews are still the same seed of the
serpent and still up to the same chicanery that they were using in the
days when Jesus identified and denounced them.
In Chapter 8 of the Book of John, Jesus says the Jews are of their
father the devil, and the lusts of their father they would do; that
their father was a liar and a murderer from the beginning. We find that
Jesus denounced them thoroughly and identified them, and all Jewry was
in this same boat. Jesus said they could not understand His speech, and
that they had no spiritual capacity whatsoever. This is brought out very
clearly, and we use these passages quite often. Remember, we have only
four books in our Bible with the Words of Jesus in them, and yet He
spent more time denouncing Jewry than any other fact brought out in the
New Testament. And it remains that the Jews of today are the
descendants of the forces that Jesus denounced in His time. In the Book
of Matthew, Jesus said that these forces of Jewry were white-washed
sepulchers and that when they called themselves Pharisees, they were
Shaman Pharisees or false Pharisees. He said they were like open graves
waiting for men to fall into them, that they were descendants of
the serpent, that they came from generations of vipers and of the asp.
John the Baptist said to them (Matthew 3:7) "0 generation of vipers, who
hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"
In Matthew Chapter 23, Jesus said to them "You have killed the prophets
and all the righteous ones who were sent to lead Israel. Then the Jews
replied "If we had lived in the time of our fathers we would not have
killed the prophets." (Matthew 23:30). Right here they trapped
themselves and Jesus replied: "Ye have just proved that ye are
descendants of the prophet killers: Ye are guilty of all the righteous
slain from Abel to Zacharias whom ye slew between the temple and the
altar.
All the Sadducees were reincarnationists; they were Canaanites,
Hittites' and Amalekites, and Jesus well knew the situation there in
Judea. The people called Jews today and those who have gone into Israeli
are descended from these same people, and their names should be Yehudim.
They should never be identified with the children of God! We have the
unfortunate situation that when the
New Testament came about, the Jews came in to help translate the Greek
and the Hebrew. One good example of this can be found in "The Passover
Plot", one of the most vicious books ever written about and against
Yahshua The Christ. It says that Jesus planned His Own Crucifixion, but
He never planned to die. According to this book, His movement was just a
big conspiracy to grab power, and His Resurrection was a part of this
conspiracy. This book was written by a vicious Jew way up in the
intellectual community and in "letters" who ALSO HELPED IN A BIG WAY TO
TRANSLATE THE REVISED VERSION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT! He had written
untold books on theology, and no one knew that he was a Jew until he
wrote "The Passover Plot", in the foreword of which he tells of his
being Jewish and how it pleased him to write that book!
Many times the word Jew is used in the New Testament. The distinction
should have been made as to the meaning ... whether men of Judah, or the
House of Judah, or Judea or (in a few instances) Judaism or Yehudim. In
the Book of Revelation we read: "Woe unto them that say they are Jews
and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan". It should
read: "Woe unto them that say they are of Judah and are not ". That was
the way it was written by John in Aramaic, but through mishandling of
the translation we have many places where the words were changed in The
Scriptures to hide the identity of Israel, and put in their places these
of anti-Christ as "the chosen people". Then by this method the
Jews try to put themselves above criticism although they deny Christ.
The Christians know that the Jews deny The Yahshua ... Jesus was YAHWEH
HIMSELF...and that He was here in a flesh and blood body, but they have
bought this great deception because of its being fed them from the top
of their institutions!
The Apostle John told you that there were already many anti-Christ in
the world even at that time, and I think we should go by the teaching of
this beloved disciple who understood what Jesus said. We are told to be
able to know an anti-Christ: IF HE IS ONE WHO DENIES THAT JESUS IS
YAHWEH COME IN THE FLESH. So what description can be more clear than
this? Jesus warned us that these people are thieves and liars, and we
should never let them come into our nation and into our homes, or into
our churches. If we do let them in, they will swear their allegiance to
Christ only to betray our nation, our homes and our schools, and to get
their hands into our pockets. We have only to turn to history to see
what happened in other nations when they were allowed to come in and
live among the Israelites. They are never to be trusted because they are
the sons of Lucifer, and the work of their father they will do! Never
has such an opposition to The Christ been retained quite as strong as
this opposition set in place by Jewry. For instance, the Jews will not
use a red cross because of their hatred of the cross. They use, instead,
the Mogen-David red star of Jewry. They hate the Deity of the Christ;
and they hate it as much as they ever did. There is no let up in the
hatred of these generations of anti-Christ people!
The Apostle Paul fell under the teachings of these of anti-Christ, and
he moved right along with their hatred until he saw Jesus on the road to
Damascus. But remember that Our Father had special plans for this
Israelite, and He had a Hand in Paul's training; so He let Paul, see
this hatred; then He stopped him on the road and said: "Saul...why
persecutest thou Me? Now Saul heard the Almighty; and he saw Jesus. But
the Jews with him said only that it thundered. Then when the Great
Apostle moved into his ministry....immediately the Jews wanted to put
Paul to death, as they had done with every follower of Jesus they could
get their hands on. The Apostle Paul says in Thessalonians that the
Jews are against God and are contrary to all men! So they are NOT THE
ISRAEL OF GOD; and by no stretch of the imagination are they a part of
Judah or Benjamin! The Jews are Hittites and Amalekites and Canaanites.
They are red, black, yellow, and brown, as well as off-colored white.
They have one thing in common: They are the offspring of Lucifer and
the fallen angels which came with Lucifer. Jesus made it quite clear
when He said: "I have chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil".
He was talking about Judas Iscariot, for his mother was not only
a Jewess, but she consorted with devils, and you can believe that
Jesus meant what He said.
In the 17th Chapter of the Gospel of John, Jesus prayed; and although
John did not hear Him pray, yet under inspiration he recorded this
prayer: "Thine they were in the heavens.
Mine they are in the earth: those that Thou gavest me I have kept, and
none of them is lost, but the son of perdition: that The Scripture might
be fulfilled". Thus Judas Iscariot was the son of Satan, and he was the
only one of the twelve who was not an Israelite.
By this declaration, then, Jesus said very clearly once again that the
children of Israel came down out of the heavens, that they were
spiritually begotten in the heavens, and they were physically begotten
in their bodies of the Adamic Race here on earth. This draws the
distinction between the Israel of God and the Jews, who are the
offspring of Lucifer and the fallen angels.
Here in these latter years you have had several things brought forward
that are in error. Many things have been done to obscure the fact that
your enemy is the same enemy that through the ages has always been the
enemy of Yahweh's Kingdom. Once again, we see the masses of Ancient
Assyria in the land of Magog gathering forces under that same
old enemy for the conquest of the earth. We have seen the doctrines of
Karl Marx financed by world Jewish interest through Kuhn, Loeb and
Company and others out of our own country along with the House of
Rothschild in Western Europe.
These same powers were to take over Russia to hurl the masses of Asia
against you once more.
Thus, you understand that world communism is a program of anti-Christ
and has made war with the Church from the hour of its beginning. In
fact, it fulfilled prophecy by creating great martyrdom in the killing
of millions of Christians in this last resurrection of your old, old
enemy.
This is the little horn of Daniel that was wounded nigh unto death, but
the wound was healed after the death of Genghis Khan; and now once again
these enemies of God's Kingdom are gathering to come against you. Yet
today we find the Israel people of God worrying about what they call the
killing of six million Jews in Germany when there were not even one
million Jews in that country at the start of World War II: AND THIS IS
ACCORDING TO JEWISH HISTORIANS. However, we hear not a word from the
Christian people about the murder of millions of Christians when
organized Jewry financed the revolution in Red Russia and even Jews from
New York City went over there as the first officials.
HOW MANY CHRISTIANS DID you ever hear question why it is termed "racist"
if you declare that Yahshua ... Jesus was White, and NOT "racist" if you
call Him a Jew, or black, yellow, or brown?
Instead of that questioning we find the Christian nations of God's
Kingdom making a covenant with their ancient enemy, and we find in the
writing of the Prophet Isaiah (Chapter 28, verse 18) the results of this
covenant that we have made. Yahweh says: "This is a covenant with death
and it shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not
stand " Yes, we made a covenant with the Soviet Union which was the mass
murderer of Christian civilization in that area, but we promised that we
would have economic exchange with them, and she promised that she would
not continue her revolution as it related to us. We do not have to
review past history to you, for you watched the violation of that
original covenant and the spread of communism before the ink was dry
upon the paper. Under this covenant with death and hell you have fought
wars against other Christian men, and today we find that one third of
Israel is under the control of communism completely; and here in this
great nation of the outstretched wings of the Eagle we see that those
of the anti-Christ have their plans drawn for the division of America
into ten provinces, just as ages ago they divided the world into ten
provinces for conquest. Many people stumble in their search for truth
in not realizing that back at ancient Babylon (Mystery Babylon) they
had maps of this planet and plans had been drawn for the division of
the earth. America was No. 5 on that ancient map, and today their plan
is still in motion as they try the metric system conquest to change
the earth. The metric system that they are trying to sell the whole
world, and which they have sold to much of the world, is an atheistic
system of 10's. Always remember that God's system is of 12s. So make
your distinction between the enemies of God and the Children of His
Kingdom. Take the word of Jesus, Who said: "Ye are not My sheep"
(John 10:26) as he talked to the Jews on Solomon's porch.
Rob
> JMJ
>
>"Rob" <R...@nospam.com> wrote in message >
>
>>snip<
>
>>Where is modern Jewry found? And how does
>>a Jew prove they're a Jew?
>
>To be considered Jewish you have to be born
>of a Jewish mother unless your a convert to
>Judaism, therefore children born of a gentile
>woman who converts to Judaism before the
>birth of her children are considered Jewish.
>
>Race has nothing to do with it,
All Jews have descended from Isaac, so that's obviously false.
Gen 21:12 But God said to Abraham, "Don't be troubled about the boy and the
slave woman. Do whatever Sarah tells you. The descendants I promised you will
be from Isaac. (NCV)
Heb 11:17-18 It was by faith that Abraham, when God tested him, offered his son
Isaac as a sacrifice. God made the promises to Abraham, but Abraham was ready
to offer his own son as a sacrifice. {18} God had said, "The descendants I
promised you will be from Isaac." (NCV)
Rob
Rob
Sounds like an anti-Christ pov to me.
Rob
oz
This is anothe wILLIE Martin Christian Identity Neo Nazi freak.
The only relevant question being is his head as pointed as his little white hat
These freaks are cowards who persecute the innocent
Spit on them as you throw them out the Church (Jesus used a whip)
In article <canterbury-22...@ppp102.dyn27.pacific.net.au>,
oz
<standan...@thepulpit.net> wrote:
SNIP
Like I say - you are a piece of neo Nazi Christian Identity filth
If the full Baptists haven't got the guts to tell you to fuck off (as
undoubtedly Jesus would) I have
So On your bike and fuck off you pile of ill informed racist shit!
God has a place for your like in Hell
and trust me - we will write "Arbeit Macht Frei" on your gates and tattoo
numbers on your arse this time
Stephen Bayzik
news:400F3251...@thepulpit.net...
> The following will hopefully provide you with the truth about
> who the Jews are religiously and racially, and provide evidence
> that Jesus Christ was not a Jew.
> Was Jesus Christ a Jew by Religion?
> The answer is clearly "NO". Jesus had the true religion of the Old
> Testament, found in the Law and the prophets; and He constantly rebuked
> the Jews for having abandoned this for Judaism under the Babylonian
> Talmud (which in His day was called "The Tradition of the Elders"). In
> Matthew 5:17-18 He said "Think not that I come to destroy the Law or the
> prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill; for verily I say
> unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no
> wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled".
Or - is it not plausible that the authors of the New Testament were
anti-Semitic?
--
Stephen Bayzik
vince garcia
"We JEWS know what we worship"
--Christ to the woman at the well
vince garcia
Shan
The cure, cause and answer for everything in the universe is
"anti-Semitic??!!" Give me a break!
Some one track minded people have no other point in mind than this
blasted anti-Semitism.
The moment anyone writes or says "Jew" or "Jewish" there has to be
someone else who brings up anti-Semitic after it.
Stop hiding behind that skirt.
shan
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
<snip>
> To answer this, we must trace the racial ancestry of both Jesus and the
> Jews. Jesus Christ was a pure-blooded member of the Tribe of Judah -
Jewdah
<snip>
DW Suiter
He wrote the truth. But then you Satanists and sons of Satan always attack
the truth.
DW Suiter
Son of God
"John W @yahoo.com>" <john_weatherly47<no> wrote in message
news:1v6v005rnlb684gbk...@4ax.com...
> x-no-archive:yes
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 21:15:45 -0500, Stan Dandeliver
> <standan...@thepulpit.net> wrote:
>
> > The following will hopefully provide you with the truth about
> >who the Jews are religiously and racially, and provide evidence
> >that Jesus Christ was not a Jew.
>
> Why has Satan filled your heart to lie about even God?
>
> John W
> >them . But of the cities of these people which the Lord thy God doth
____________________________________________________________________________
___
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
>
DW Suiter
DW Suiter
Son of God
"Stephen Bayzik" <stephen...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:SMJPb.6202$rW5.4...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Stephen Bayzik
news:1010qlq...@corp.supernews.com...
> No, they were antireligion.
> DW Suiter
> Son of God
Perhaps this question would provide the incentive for some Evangelical Bible
College to start a project to find his foreskin. :-)
--
Stephen Bayzik
Son of Bayzik
FRANKIE LEE
Son of God
Replies: You are not worthy to call yourself the same name, known and
attribute to Lord Jesus Christ only,who is also known as Son of God.
Are you that anti-Christ,that was to come or shall we look for another?
No Christian who is in the right mind would have used that Title,Son of God.
This is blasphemy to identify yourself with Him.
"DW Suiter" <dwsu...@toast.net> wrote in message
news:1010qod...@corp.supernews.com...
CharliePF1
> Rob wrote:
>
> > Where is modern Jewry found?
>
> Who Are The Jews?
> by Dr. Wesley A. Swift
>
> It is frightening today to see many preachers have gone all out for the
> Jews,
<paranoid shit deleted>
Dr. Smith is a moron, and you are an idiot for quoting him.
On that point, almost everyone in these newsgroups will agree.
DW Suiter
teach others to enter into and follow this way. Any person against this way
is anti-Christ. As Jesus of Nazareth said; "Whosoever is not with me is
against me." It appears you are also against Christ and the way of Christ,
being the true "Anti-Christ."
It's not me you speak against but the word of truth I speak; a Word from
God.
DW Suiter
Son of God
"FRANKIE LEE" <s964...@singnet.com.sg> wrote in message
news:buq5op$j6b$1...@reader01.singnet.com.sg...
Rob
wrote:
> DW Suiter
> Son of God
>
>Replies: You are not worthy to call yourself the same name, known and
>attribute to Lord Jesus Christ only,who is also known as Son of God.
>
>Are you that anti-Christ,that was to come or shall we look for another?
Touché.
Rob
Og
Freida Gogh
Perhaps Dr. Smith is a moron, but when it comes to Dr. Wesley A.
Swift, it's a whole different story. He is a pastor who dedicated
many years of studying the Scriptures, and is more than qualified
as an authority on the subject.
oz
<freid...@thehearing.com> wrote:
Nope!
Jesus was a Jew There is NO doubt about that
The modern Jews are descendents of the Jews of Jesuses time, there is NO
doubt about that
That it doesn't matter really except when such debates are used to defame
and vilify Jews - there is NO doubt about that.
oz
When they try to express themselves intellectually they come across as
dupes and fools suckered by someone elses fascist agenda
Remember the Roehm purge anyone?
The night Hitler massacred his former supporters
Michael
> Yes
Not much evidence of that, He rejected the teaching of the temple.
--
May God Bless You
Michael
"Those that give up essential liberty for a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety." Benjamin Franklin
The Last Church
wrote:
>< "Og" wrote:
><> Yes
><
><Not much evidence of that, He rejected the teaching of the temple.
So does any person who seeks the truth of all things with out fear,
as do I.
.
In the mind of Christ,
Michael
**
A preacher is the blind
leading the blind...
The Last Church
http://www.thelastchurch.org
lea...@thelastchurch.org
alt.religion.thelastchurch
alt.religion.the-last-church
Richard Jackson
serpent all over again! who's truth, yours or Gods?
Christ says "When the Spirit of
truth, comes, it will guide you into all truth.
It will not speak on it's own;
and it will tell you what is yet to come.
It will take from what is mine and make
it known to you.
yet to come! (get it, yet, future)and if you seek Gods truth it will be made
known to you! (get it, known to you only if you seek it) another religion
twisting Gods word to their own destruction, shame, shame, better reread
Romans as you are subject to the authority of your government as long as it
does not go against Gods will, and yes, when you truly accept Christ Jesus
he will teach and change you,(sinful man cannot) and how does a person get
to know Christ, by hearing the word, ( the Gospel) and Paul explains the
duties of priests, ministers , bishops and even us as ambassadors, but
that's right, your teachings are more important than Gods and the Lords,
what love and compassion you have , putting down everyone except people who
think that they are God, you use Jesus name and yet put down God himself, as
for the temple (tent)of God which we as believers are, and the temple
(tent)as with Moses temple (tent)is a temporary dwelling place for God with
and in us till we have replaced the corruptible with the incorruptible,
which is and will be a permanent, immortal, and sinless dwelling place for
God in us, ( get that, temporary till Jesus return) Gods love comes from
God, not man, therefore it is impossible for you to teach it, but it is
possible for you as an ambassador of God to bring others to God where he can
guide and change them.
so then, you are a preacher, blind leading the blind, your words. and a
church is a called out assembly of believers, called out by Jesus, not man.
and you called it the last church, (hope so, we do not need any more
religions)same as all the churches you put down. mans interpretation, just
like the pharacies. just like the rest of the cults, take what you like and
ignore the rest.(the parts you do not understand and are blind to)
by the way, he rejected the teaching and traditions of the pharacies and
their self-righteous religion, not the temple, because as now as was then
they did not understand the truth and meaning of Gods word. too much Adam in
them.
the only reason I replied is that the Lord has been teaching me to do things
with love, getting better, yet still have a way to go (got to quit going
round the mountain and just head for the summit) he will let me know if I
was out of line.
Richard Jackson
"The Last Church" <bleah...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:c94m9012s5g1iuaqd...@4ax.com...
`G' `O' `D' `S' ___`C' `R' `E' `A' `T' `O' `R'
> I see, ignore Gods word but take your word, sound like the garden and the
> serpent all over again! who's truth, yours or Gods?
>
>
>> So does any person who seeks the truth of all things with out fear,
>>as do I.
>>
>>.
>> In the mind of Christ,
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>**
>>A preacher is the blind
>>leading the blind...
>>
>>The Last Church
>>http://www.thelastchurch.org
>>lea...@thelastchurch.org
>>
>>alt.religion.thelastchurch
>>alt.religion.the-last-church
>
>
>
Thus Spake God's Creator; (I don't forgive shit!)
You have been hypnotized by *someone*, that
told you... "Let Me Inside Your Mind".
Or,
"Will you accept Jesus as your personal savior" ?
If you said Yes, Yes, YESS!, HELL YES!!!!!
Well, they stole your brain...
Of course you didn't loose very much, because you
were already *stupid*.
Because, you closed your eyes and allowed them
to put crazy *thoughts* inside your head.
You will *NEVER* be able to get those "thoughts"
out of your mind, for the rest of your entire life.
Ain't life....... a bitch ?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GOD'S CREATOR.... (my only sin!)
Wise men face the unknown, and boldly looks for reality!
Others... fall on their hands and knees, and start mumbling...
Today's Religions News:
http://fullcoverage.yahoo.com/Full_Coverage/World/Religion_News/
Today's Religion Industry:
http://www.refdesk.com/factrel.html
chri...@velocitus.net
you posted in alt.religion.christian :
>In article <101b38c...@corp.supernews.com>, "Og" <O...@bashan.org> wrote:
>
>> Yes
>
>Not much evidence of that, He rejected the teaching of the temple.
He rejected the teachings that were added by men, not the teachings
from God.
So what do YOU think He was? An American Indian?
LOL!
Christian
Edward Bagnaschi
His ethnics, but on who He is.
Richard Jackson
and everyone else you have no faith so you have not had god in your life
yet, that simple guy, only those who have had will know! the rest are blind.
"`G' `O' `D' `S' ___`C' `R' `E' `A' `T' `O' `R'" <Reall...@Go.Com> wrote
in message news:yKZmc.12023$V97....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Riain Barton
The archetypal Jewish hero was Joshua (the successor of Moses) otherwise
known as Yeshua ben Nun (‘Jesus of the fish’). Since the name Jesus (Yeshua
or Yeshu in Hebrew, Ioshu in Greek, source of the English spelling)
originally was a title (meaning ‘saviour’, derived from ‘Yahweh Saves’)
probably every band in the Jewish resistance had its own hero figure
sporting this moniker, among others.
Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen
different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed
Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty -eight high priests who held
office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer
than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben
Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel. Even Saint Paul makes reference to a rival
magician, preaching ‘another Jesus’ (2 Corinthians 11,4). The surfeit of
early Jesuses includes:
Jesus ben Sirach, reputedly the author of the Book of Sirach (aka
'Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach'). part of Old
Testament apocrypha. This Jesus, writing in Greek about 180 B.C.E., brought
together Jewish 'wisdom' and Homeric-style heroes.
Jesus ben Pandira. A wonder-worker during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus
(106-79 B.C.), one of the most ruthless of the Maccabean kings. Imprudently,
this Jesus launched into a career of end-time prophesy and agitation which
upset the king. He met his own premature end-time by being hung on a tree –
and on the eve of a Passover. Scholars have speculated this Jesus founded
the Essene sect.
Jesus ben Ananias. Beginning in 62AD, this Jesus had caused disquiet in
Jerusalem with a non-stop doom-laden mantra of ‘Woe to the city’. He
prophesied rather vaguely:
'A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four
winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the
bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against the whole people.'
(Josephus, Wars 6:3)
Arrested and flogged by the Romans, he was released as nothing more
dangerous than a mad man. He died during the siege of Jerusalem from a rock
hurled by a Roman catapult.
Jesus ben Saphat. In the insurrection of 68AD that wrought havoc in Galilee,
this Jesus had led the rebels in Tiberias. When the city was about to fall
to Vespasian’s legionaries he fled north to Tarichea on the Sea of Galilee.
Jesus ben Gamala. During 68/69 AD this Jesus was a leader of the
‘peace party’ in the civil war wrecking Judaea. From the walls of Jerusalem
he had remonstrated with the besieging Idumeans (led by ‘James and John,
sons of Susa’). It did him no good. When the Idumeans breached the walls he
was put to death and his body thrown to the dogs and carrion birds.
Jesus ben Thebuth. A priest who, in the final capitulation of the
upper city in 69AD, saved his own skin by surrendering the treasures of the
Temple, which included two holy candlesticks, goblets of pure gold, sacred
curtains and robes of the high priests. The booty figured prominently in the
Triumph held for Vespasian and his son Titus.
But was there a crucified Jesus? Certainly. Jesus ben Stada was a Judean
agitator who gave the Romans a headache in the early years of the second
century. He met his end in the town of Lydda (twenty five miles from
Jerusalem) at the hands of a Roman crucifixion crew. And given the scale
that Roman retribution could reach – at the height of the siege of Jerusalem
the Romans were crucifying upwards of five hundred captives a day before the
city walls – dead heroes called Jesus would (quite literally) have been
thick on the ground. Not one merits a full-stop in the great universal
history.
But then with so many Jesuses could there not have been a Jesus of Nazareth?
The problem for this notion is that absolutely nothing at all corroborates
the sacred biography and yet this 'greatest story' is peppered with numerous
anachronisms, contradictions and absurdities. For example, at the time that
Joseph and the pregnant Mary are said to have gone off to Bethlehem for a
supposed Roman census, Galilee (unlike Judaea) was not a Roman province and
therefore ma and pa would have had no reason to make the journey. Even if
Galilee had been imperial territory, history knows of no ‘universal census’
ordered by Augustus (nor any other emperor) – and Roman taxes were based on
property ownership not on a head count. Then again, we now know that
Nazareth did not exist before the second century.
It is mentioned not at all in the Old Testament nor by Josephus, who waged
war across the length and breadth of Galilee (a territory about the size of
Greater London) and yet Josephus records the names of dozens of other towns.
In fact most of the ‘Jesus-action’ takes place in towns of equally doubtful
provenance, in hamlets so small only partisan Christians know of their
existence (yet well attested pagan cities, with extant ruins, failed to make
the Jesus itinerary).
What should alert us to wholesale fakery here is that practically all the
events of Jesus’s supposed life appear in the lives of mythical figures of
far more ancient origin. Whether we speak of miraculous birth, prodigious
youth, miracles or wondrous healings – all such 'signs' had been ascribed to
other gods, centuries before any Jewish holy man strolled about. Jesus’s
supposed utterances and wisdom statements are equally common place, being
variously drawn from Jewish scripture, neo-Platonic philosophy or
commentaries made by Stoic and Cynic sages.
Too strange to be a coincidence!
According to the Biblical account, Pilate offered the Jews the release of
just one prisoner and the cursed race chose Barabbas rather than gentle
Jesus.
But hold on a minute: in the original text studied by Origen (and in some
recent ones) the chosen criminal was Jesus Barabbas – and Bar Abba in Hebrew
means ‘Son of the Father’!
Are we to believe that Pilate had a Jesus, Son of God and a Jesus, Son of
the Father in his prison at the same time??!!
Perhaps the truth is that a single executed criminal helped flesh out the
whole fantastic fable. Gospel writers, in scrambling details, used the
Aramaic Barabbas knowing that few Latin or Greek speakers would know its
meaning.
'Jesus of Nazareth' supposedly lived in what is the most well-documented
period of antiquity – the first century of the Christian era – yet not a
single non-Christian source mentions the miracle worker from the sky. All
references – including the notorious insertions in Josephus – stem from
partisan Christian sources (and Josephus himself, much argued over, was not
even born until after the supposed crucifixion). The horrendous truth is
that the Christian Jesus was manufactured from plundered sources,
re-purposed for the needs of the early Church.
It is not with a human being that the Jesus myth begins. Christ is not a
deified man but a humanised god who happened to be given the name Yeshu.
Those real Jesuses, those that lived and died within normal human
parameters, may have left stories and legends behind, later cannibalised by
Christian scribes as source material for their own hero, but it is not with
any flesh and blood rebel/rabbi/wonder-worker that the story begins. Rather,
its genesis is in theology itself.
Makes You Think:
Many elements of the 'Passion' make no sense historically.
A trial for Jesus, when suspected rebels were habitually arrested and
executed by the Romans without trial? Philo of Alexandria ((On the embassy
to Gaius, XXXVIII) speaks of Pilate's ' continual murders of people untried
and uncondemned.'
And why would the Romans have allowed a convicted felon to be almost
immediately removed from his cross and put in a tomb? Crucifixion was chosen
precisely to make a public point that the most cruel and humiliating form of
punishment awaits those who oppose Rome's will. Roman disposition on this
point was perhaps best summed up by Quintilian (AD 35-95, Decl 274) when he
wrote that:
'Whenever we crucify the guilty, the most crowded roads are chosen, where
most people can see and be moved by this fear. For penalties relate not so
much to retribution as to their exemplary effect.'
A century earlier, after the 'slave revolt' led by Spartacus, 6,000
prisoners were thus crucified along the Via Appia between the cities of Rome
and Cappua, as a gruesome deterrent to further rebellion. Doubtless the
corpses were left on their crosses to rot or to provide food for wild beasts
and birds of prey.
But of course if the 'Passion' were really a pageant of a re-born sun-god it
makes perfect sense that the 'sacrificed' actor be taken off-stage,
subsequently reappearing in a later act, 'reborn'…
"Richard Jackson" <booger...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:lEYmc.32819$6L3.619@fed1read05...
D1Lax
• R.L. Measures
d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
• It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
Michael
Measures) wrote:
> In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
>
> > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
>
> • It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
> themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
however, was a Christian.
Michael
> Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
True, fortunately, Christianity is not a religion, but a reality.
• R.L. Measures
mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> In article <+r-2105041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> Measures) wrote:
>
> > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> >
> > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
> >
> > • It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
> > themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
>
> Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
> however, was a Christian.
• To which Christian church did Jefferson belong?
• R.L. Measures
> In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
>
> > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
>
> True, fortunately, Christianity is not a religion, but a reality.
• Muhammadanism is also a reality, and like Christianity, a bloody one.
- ł... religion must be the cause of unity, harmony and agreement among
mankind. If it be the cause of discord and hostility, if it leads to
separation and creates conflict, the absence of religion would be
preferable in the world.˛ -`Abduąl-Baha, Bahaąi World Faith, page 247.
Michael
Measures) wrote:
> In article <mikeburt-060...@192.168.1.105>,
> mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
>
> > In article <+r-2105041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> > Measures) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
> > >
> > > • It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
> > > themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
> >
> > Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
> > however, was a Christian.
>
> • To which Christian church did Jefferson belong?
He was of the the only one that counts, the Body of Christ.
Michael
> In article <mikeburt-060...@192.168.1.105>,
> mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
>
> > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> >
> > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
> >
> > True, fortunately, Christianity is not a religion, but a reality.
>
> • Muhammadanism is also a reality, and like Christianity, a bloody one.
Islam is another religion, not a reality.
>
> - ł... religion must be the cause of unity, harmony and agreement among
> mankind. If it be the cause of discord and hostility, if it leads to
> separation and creates conflict, the absence of religion would be
> preferable in the world.˛ -`Abduąl-Baha, Bahaąi World Faith, page 247.
`Abduąl-Baha, Bahaąi World Faith. What weight does that carry?
Our Lord was more accurate when He said Levi-Matthew 10:34* Think not that
I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
Gill rightly comments:I came, not to send peace, but a sword. By the
"sword" may be meant the Gospel, which is the means of dividing and
separating the people of Christ from the men of the world [which includes
old `Abduąl-Baha, Bahaąi World Faith] , and from their principles and
practices, and one relation from another; as also of divisions, discords,
and persecutions arising from it: not that it was the intention and design
of Christ, in coming into the world, to foment and encourage such things;
but this, through the malice and wickedness of men, was eventually the
effect and consequence of his coming; see #Lu 12:51| where, instead of a
"sword", it is "division"; because the sword divides asunder, as does the
sword of the Spirit, the word of God.
• R.L. Measures
mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> In article <+r-0606041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> Measures) wrote:
>
> > In article <mikeburt-060...@192.168.1.105>,
> > mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <+r-2105041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> > > Measures) wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > > > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant
belief.
> > > >
> > > > • It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
> > > > themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
> > >
> > > Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
> > > however, was a Christian.
> >
> > • To which Christian church did Jefferson belong?
>
> He was of the the only one that counts, the Body of Christ.
• thank you
• R.L. Measures
mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> In article <+r-0606041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> Measures) wrote:
>
> > In article <mikeburt-060...@192.168.1.105>,
> > mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant belief.
> > >
> > > True, fortunately, Christianity is not a religion, but a reality.
> >
> > • Muhammadanism is also a reality, and like Christianity, a bloody one.
>
> Islam is another religion, not a reality.
>
> >
> > - ł... religion must be the cause of unity, harmony and agreement among
> > mankind. If it be the cause of discord and hostility, if it leads to
> > separation and creates conflict, the absence of religion would be
> > preferable in the world.˛ -`Abduąl-Baha, Bahaąi World Faith, page 247.
>
> `Abduąl-Baha, Bahaąi World Faith. What weight does that carry?
>
> Our Lord was more accurate when He said Levi-Matthew 10:34* Think not that
> I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
>
> Gill
• Who is 'Gill'?
>rightly comments:I came, not to send peace, but a sword. By the
> "sword" may be meant the Gospel, which is the means of dividing and
> separating the people of Christ from the men of the world [which includes
> old `Abduąl-Baha, Bahaąi World Faith] , and from their principles and
> practices, and one relation from another; as also of divisions, discords,
> and persecutions arising from it: not that it was the intention and design
> of Christ, in coming into the world, to foment and encourage such things;
> but this, through the malice and wickedness of men, was eventually the
> effect and consequence of his coming; see #Lu 12:51| where, instead of a
> "sword", it is "division"; because the sword divides asunder, as does the
> sword of the Spirit, the word of God.
--
Brian Ceccarelli
didn't trust Christ since TJ wrote his own Bible without JC's miracles, and
in doing so, dismisses his divinity. Also, I read once that John Adam's
wife did not want Thomas Jefferson to be president because he wasn't a
Christian. She was quite upset.
In any case, Thomas Jefferson gave up his life and wealth for this country.
Christian or not, I so respect him nonetheless.
Atheists also like to quote Thomas Paine for his anti-Christian statements.
I read TP's books "Common Sense" and "Age of Reason", and I have found that
atheists severely misquote Thomas Paine.
TJ and TP spent a lot of time in France. Both of them were justifiably
turned off by the "priest-crafters which filch wealth and power to
themselves" in France. Just like we have our Robert Tildens and Benny
Hinns, 18th century France had its filchers.
I don't know about TJ, but TP made some pretty astute observations about the
filchers and why there were wrong biliblically. The "Age of Reason" is one
profound book in this respect. Paine does accuse the filchers justifiably,
but he never says a bad thing about Jesus. TP actually stands up for the
right that *all* men have a right to own property and that no man should
enslave another. Paine invokes the Bible for justification: God says,
"God gave dominion of the earth to all men, and God gave man dominion over
the animals, not to other men." Paine did this to point out the
hyprocrisy in the French government and church who found reasons to enslave
men to do deny land ownership to the common man.
The comments Thomas Paine makes are against religious men and their
hyprocrisy. Jesus said the same about the religious men of his time.
And so, our response is:
"I follow Christ, not Christianity."
It is Christ that counts in the end, not Christianity.
> > > . It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
> > > themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
> >
> > Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
> > however, was a Christian.
>
> . To which Christian church did Jefferson belong?
• R.L. Measures
Ceccarelli" <sp...@talusmusic.com> wrote:
> Was Thomas Jefferson a Christian? Did he trust Christ? He certainly
> didn't trust Christ since TJ wrote his own Bible without JC's miracles, and
> in doing so, dismisses his divinity. Also, I read once that John Adam's
> wife did not want Thomas Jefferson to be president because he wasn't a
> Christian. She was quite upset.
>
> In any case, Thomas Jefferson gave up his life and wealth for this country.
> Christian or not, I so respect him nonetheless.
>
> Atheists also like to quote Thomas Paine for his anti-Christian statements.
> I read TP's books "Common Sense" and "Age of Reason", and I have found that
> atheists severely misquote Thomas Paine.
>
> TJ and TP spent a lot of time in France. Both of them were justifiably
> turned off by the "priest-crafters which filch wealth and power to
> themselves" in France. Just like we have our Robert Tildens and Benny
> Hinns, 18th century France had its filchers. ... ...
>
• The last I heard, Benny Hinn is currently filching c. $100M a year for
'The Lord'. The amazing thing is that Rev. Hinn is able to convince
cancer victims that they have been miraculously cured right up to within a
few days of their funerals.
cheers, Brian
Michael
Measures) wrote:
> In article <mikeburt-070...@192.168.1.105>,
> mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
>
> > In article <+r-0606041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> > Measures) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <mikeburt-060...@192.168.1.105>,
> > > mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <+r-2105041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> > > > Measures) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > > > > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant
> belief.
> > > > >
> > > > > • It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
> > > > > themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
> > > >
> > > > Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
> > > > however, was a Christian.
> > >
> > > • To which Christian church did Jefferson belong?
> >
> > He was of the the only one that counts, the Body of Christ.
>
> • thank you
You're welcome
Paul Laird
". R.L. Measures" <+r...@somis.org> wrote in message
news:+r-060604...@192.168.1.100...> > In article <+r-2105041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (. R.L.
> > Measures) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant
belief.
> > >
> > > themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
> >
> > Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
> > however, was a Christian.
>
>
> --
> ? R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
By membership Thomas Jefferson was an Episcopalian (or Anglican)
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
• R.L. Measures
<small...@ywave.com> wrote:
> ". R.L. Measures" <+r...@somis.org> wrote in message
> news:+r-060604...@192.168.1.100...
> > In article <mikeburt-060...@192.168.1.105>,
> > mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <+r-2105041...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (. R.L.
> > > Measures) wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <7dc9810d.04052...@posting.google.com>,
> > > > d1...@hotmail.com (D1Lax) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Religion is nothing more then an ancient civilizations'ignorant
> belief.
> > > >
> > > > . It's also a way for priest-crafters to "filch wealth and power to
> > > > themselves.." Thomas Jefferson, 1810
> > >
> > > Thomas had a great and justified mistrust in the church of men, he,
> > > however, was a Christian.
> >
> > . To which Christian church did Jefferson belong?
> >
> > --
> > ? R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
>
> By membership Thomas Jefferson was an Episcopalian (or Anglican)
>
** Thanks, Paul. Were Thomas Jefferson's parents Episcopalian?
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
Paul Laird
I don't know, but let's extrapolate. Jefferson's parents, and Jefferson,
were born in England. The Anglican Church was the official Christian Church
of England, so one could say with some degree of certainity that Jefferson's
parents, if they were members of a church, were most likely Anglican.
• R.L. Measures
<small...@ywave.com> wrote:
• How then could Thomas have been the third President?
>...
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
Michael
• R.L. Measures
mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
> In article <+r-1006040...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> Measures) wrote:
>
> > In article <40c7d182$1...@corp.newsgroups.com>, "Paul Laird"
> > <small...@ywave.com> wrote:
> >
> > > ". R.L. Measures" <+r...@somis.org> wrote in message
> > > news:+r-080604...@192.168.1.100...
> > > > In article <40c5c7e6$1...@corp.newsgroups.com>, "Paul Laird"
> > > > <small...@ywave.com> wrote:
> > > >...
> > > > ** Thanks, Paul. Were Thomas Jefferson's parents Episcopalian?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ? R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
> > >
> > > I don't know, but let's extrapolate. Jefferson's parents, and Jefferson,
> > > were born in England.
> >
> > • How then could Thomas have been the third President?
>
> he was elected.
• According to the Constitution, only perdons who were born in the United
States can be President.
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
Michael
Measures) wrote:
> In article <mikeburt-150...@192.168.1.105>,
> mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
>
> > In article <+r-1006040...@192.168.1.100>, +r...@somis.org (• R.L.
> > Measures) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <40c7d182$1...@corp.newsgroups.com>, "Paul Laird"
> > > <small...@ywave.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > ". R.L. Measures" <+r...@somis.org> wrote in message
> > > > news:+r-080604...@192.168.1.100...
> > > > > In article <40c5c7e6$1...@corp.newsgroups.com>, "Paul Laird"
> > > > > <small...@ywave.com> wrote:
> > > > >...
> > > > > ** Thanks, Paul. Were Thomas Jefferson's parents Episcopalian?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > ? R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
> > > >
> > > > I don't know, but let's extrapolate. Jefferson's parents, and
Jefferson,
> > > > were born in England.
> > >
> > > • How then could Thomas have been the third President?
> >
> > he was elected.
>
> • According to the Constitution, only perdons who were born in the United
> States can be President.
That is a partial truth, and in that not a correct statement.
Article II states that NO Person except a natural born Citizen, or a
Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this
Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President......
Jefferson was an American Citizen for over 12 years at the time of the
Adoption of that Constitution and qualified for the office of President,
otherwise, they would have had to wait 23 years for the first President as
the Consitution was written 12 years after the founding of the United
States of America in the year of our Lord, One Thousand seven hundred and
Eithty Seven at article VII.
BTW, for the reading challenged, no one alive qualifies as a Citizen at
the time of the Adoption of the Constitution today, requiring that any
candidate now must be a natural born Citizen. Sorry Arnold.
• R.L. Measures
mike...@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote:
• Article II has nothing to do with the Presidency.
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
Michael
Measures) wrote:
What does Article II of the Constitution for the United States of America
1787 have to do with?
• R.L. Measures
> > > > • According to the Constitution, only persons who were born in
the United
> > > > States can be President.
> > >
> > > That is a partial truth, and in that not a correct statement.
> > >
> > > Article II states that NO Person except a natural born Citizen, or a
> > > Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this
> > > Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President......
> > >
> > • Article II has nothing to do with the Presidency.
>
> What does Article II of the Constitution for the United States of America
> 1787 have to do with?
• One Article II is about the right of the people to keep and bear
arms. The other Article II is about the 14-year citizenship requirement
for the office of President at the time the Constitution was adopted. .
. IOW, I was wrong.
cheers
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org. + in adr = spam trap
Michael
Actually the inalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms not
being able to be taken away by the government is Amendment II, not Article
II. No problem, it was an honest mistake, we have all made them.
I sometimes get confused when turning right and turn instead, in the
direction of the 'other right'.