Great Christian Deception.

Author: Stephen ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 36
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,468
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen


     Christians have been deceiving themselves for millennia

    Jesus himself makes it perfectly clear why he had returned to Jerusalem:
    "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel", he says. Matthew15:24 Well who else?
    Jesus was a Jew (of the tribe of Judah). And believed himself to be King of all Israel. All the 12 houses/Tribes of Israel were Israelites that had been scattered throughout the known world by the time of Jesus.
    God said: “And I will make you a great nation”.

    After King Solomon had died, the Israelites divided their kingdom in two.The north became Israel with 10 tribes. The other two tribes in the south were called Judah. Jesus was of the house of Judah and it was to the lost sheep that made up all 12 houses (Israel) that he had specifically “been sent”to re-unite as  Mathew15:24  makes perfectly clear.
    In fact the bible tells us that “all Israel“ are “sons of of god”! And the praise of “all” of Israel doesn’t stop there;  it goes further telling us that all Jews are “gods”!!!!;

    Psalm82:6
    I said, “You are gods,
    And all of you are sons of the Most High. Exodus4:22 “Israel is my firstborn son”. 

    Not a Christian included or a Christian in sight. No matter how much one argues this biblical fact with a Christian, they will always deny it and attempt to reinterpret it and tell us -   ‘what Jesus meant ‘.

    It should come as no surprise to any atheist that just this one word “ONLY” becomes two completely different words - “all nations”when the Christian attempt to explain away and reinterpret this biblical fact of ‘what Jesus actually meant’. It is nothing more than an attempt to include themselves into the Jew/Israelite god sheep fold.
    This of course is clutching at straws, these straws;

    Mark16:15 KJV “And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature”, with Matthew 28:19-20 saying similar “all nations” ……….
    ………..which goes nowhere to explain why Christians are of the mistaken belief that Jesus “was sent to save them”!? Besides, Jesus also says this to his disciples: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. Matthew10: 5-6.<<that would be the lost sheep of the nations of Jacob/Israel and Jesus clearly making a distinction between those that are his “lost sheep” and those that are not.

    One would think that Christians would have taken the hint considering that not a single one of the four evangelists, Matthew,Mark, Luke, nor John,even mention the words Christian or Christians!? And neither did Jesus.

    And even after the death of Jesus the word is only mentioned less than a handful of times!!!
    Acts26:28 and Acts 11:26, “The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch ” Syria where there were hundreds of thousands of diaspora (scattered) Jews and those verses were written in Greek nearly 100 years after the crucifixion.

    And 1 Peter 4:16 “However,if you suffer as a Christian”, – (dates vary) 65- 85 years after the fact.
    And of course it is common knowledge that Jesus failed in his mission to unite these 12 Israelite houses and even to this day they remain dispersed all over the globe.



  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @Stephen
    One would think that Christians would have taken the hint considering that not a single one of the four evangelists, Matthew,Mark, Luke, nor John,even mention the words Christian or Christians!? And neither did Jesus.
    Since the word "Christian" didn't even exist during Jesus' lifetime, the observation that He and the four books written about His life never used the word is wholly uninteresting.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 57
    Forum posts: 2,385
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    > Stephen

    Your understanding of chronology, and its relation to creation of words, is pathetic. I need not be a Christian to note that, nor even much of a follower of historic events to recognize your lack. Jesus said on multiple occasions that he was sent to his own, to the remnants of the House of Israel, or, to the 12 tribes of Israel [Jacob, son of Issac], i.e. the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulon, Joseph, Benjamin [Jacob's 12 sons]. It is true; after Solomon, the twelve tribes separated, north and south, with nine tribes [not ten, because the levitical tribe was not ever given a territory, but were assigned to work in the temple located in Jerusalem, where it remain to the time of Jesus] in the north, calling themselves by the name "Israel", and two tribes, Judah and Benjamin, in the south, calling themselves "Judah."  "Christian" was not a name known during the life of Christ, but his followers, as you have noted in Acts, were called such afterward. But each member of each tribe knew their lineage [Reuben, etc]. Family ties, then, were far more prevalent then than they are now. That Jesus, himself, was sent only to the House of Israel by no means indicated that the apostles and other disciples would be so restricted.  Jesus, himself, expanded the effort by telling them, as you noted, and conveniently oppose, in Mark 16, and Matthew 28, to go into all the world to preach. At that point, the gospel was to be taught to all nations, not just the House of Israel. You start with baby steps, and learn to do more, yeah? It's how you learned, isn't it? Talk to people you know, then become more familiar with talking to strangers. What's so hard to understand about that? That "Christian" was not an extant word as Jesus began his ministry is not such a unique event. Why try to make it so, and in the process, attempt to de-legitimize a group of people. We hang labels on people, yeah? Mostly by what they espouse. As you had no "Christians" before and even during Christ, called by that moniker, of course, they did not exist. Now, they do. So bloody what?
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @fauxlaw
    Minor quibble: Ephraim and Manasseh were often counted as two separate tribes, so there were ten Northern tribes.

    Okay, I'll stop being a pedant. For now.
  • FLRW
    FLRW avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 526
    3
    2
    5
    FLRW avatar
    FLRW

    The concept that a God who created 70 thousand million million million - or seven followed by 22 zeros - stars visible from the Earth through telescopes, impregnated a virgin
    to create his only son is laughable.  Listen to the real greatest Jew that ever lived:   “The word God is for me nothing but the expression of and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends, no interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change anything about this.”- Albert Einstein 1954

  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @FLRW
    This is where the atheist implies that we should base our truth on his credulity. Does anyone ever fall for such sloppy thinking?

    And our appealer to authority in chief, quotes Einstein again, is Einstein his high priest or just a man? 

    concept that a God who created 70 thousand million million million - or seven followed by 22 zeros - stars visible from the Earth through telescopes,...
    He actually created more.

    impregnated a virgin to create...
    Jesus was not created. Just pointing out yet again that you don't know Christian doctrine and thus are ignorant of what you reject.

    ...his only son is....
    ...one of the most sublime revelations in the Bible. That this great King, this mighty creator of the universe loves me, and wants me to be with Him! The Bible already tackled this point....

    Psa 8:3 - When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,
    Psa 8:4 -  I ask  what is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them?

    It's laughable to you because you don't know your value in the eyes of God, because you don't know God. 
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,940
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @ethang5
    Yep you're right....The bible is laughable and shouldn't be taken too seriously....Just enjoy it for the book of Middle Eastern folklore that it is.

    And if you want to sing and dance about it on a Sunday morning in that enormous church of yours...... Then, go and have a good time..

    Still no nearer to explaining universal creation though. 
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,468
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    Those that are interested in these ambiguous and anomalous half  stories in the scriptures may want to take note that the New Testament records the word "Jew" or "Jews" 185 times.

    Of the four gospels John is the most prolific in his use of the word clocking up 70 times in all;  whilst the other three only use the word 16 times between them,  12 of which are in reference to Jesus as "King of the Jews".  Yes JEWS!!! now there's a surprise.

    The book of Acts refers almost 80 times to "the Jew"; whilst we can some 27 time in the Pauls letters,  in his Epistle to the Romans. That will Paul the self confessed murderer of Jews including women,Acts 22 and obviously forgiven and in paradise now  .  Interesting too  that Christians have it  that,   Paul was executed without a single piece of biblical evidence to support this claim. Interesting too the Paul is martyred simply because it is  "believed"  that he was beheaded. No one knows when , where or why?  And beheading of Christians  doesn't sound very Roman does it?  I could do a whole thread on Paul, he  of many faces and the reader wouldn't be surprised to find that there are many different versions about his conversation or "epiphany"; that's to say Pauls change from being what ever he was claiming to be  at the time to being a  Christian.

       That said,  if anyone should take credit for the birth of this new religion - Christianity- way after the death of the Jew Jesus, that credit should go to Paul , and certainly not Jesus the Jew who would have been appalled that a whole new religious movement had sprang up in his name. 

    Anyway;
    Elsewhere in the New Testament the word"Jew" is only mentioned twice and that is in the Book of Revelation. So the Christian should be elated that they are not included in the apocalyptic book of punishment and destruction intended for the Jewish audience.



  • Soluminsanis
    Soluminsanis avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 73
    0
    1
    5
    Soluminsanis avatar
    Soluminsanis
    --> @FLRW
    "impregnated a virgin
    to create his only son"


    The council of Nicea would like to know your location


  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @Soluminsanis
    Just don't tell St. Nick where he is, or things are apt to get violent.
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 5,474
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @zedvictor4
    Then, go and have a good time..
    Trying to anti-theist, but some yokel atheist kees coming to the religion board to tag on my good time.

    Still no nearer to explaining universal creation though.
    Lol. Maybe you can sanction Christianity for not "explaining the universal creation" to you Benny. Lord knows that is Christianity's purpose. 
  • Soluminsanis
    Soluminsanis avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 73
    0
    1
    5
    Soluminsanis avatar
    Soluminsanis
    --> @SirAnonymous
    I've come to give gifts to kids,  and punch heretics,  and right now,  I'm all out of gifts
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,468
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen


    The telling thing about Christians denying the obvious is when we get to Jesus at the last supper and his instructions to his disciples to carry on and achieve the mission that he says he was sent  to do: " "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel", he says. Matthew15:24 
     
    At this point he had already "blessed them" with the holy spirit to go out into the world and do their miracles as he had done;

    "Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give. Matthew 10:8". (odd that with these new powerful gifts not a single one of them recognise that Satan "had entered Judas" while they were filling their faces, isn't it? Luke 22:3. The world would have been a different place altogether,..maybe? ) .

    Anyway:

    we are at the last supper and Jesus makes them this promise:

    Luke22:15-30

    "my Father has granted me a Kingdom, I now grant you the right to eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom. And you will sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel".
    29-30.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
    Well, what can one say. Again this is a categorical statement made by Jesus the JEW, in a private meeting to twelve of his JEW disciples about who they were to rule over.

    Mathews gospel supports the supper comment by telling us :

    Matthew19:28 - 29
    Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things,when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel".
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Again we see , that it  is to Israel that this promise was made to.  Those that Jesus clearly tells us he had been sent to. Those that god called "My sons"  and told them "you are gods".
    Psalm82:6
    I said, “You are gods,
    And all of you are sons of the Most High.

    Exodus4:22 “Israel is my firstborn son”. 
    Can a single Christian claim to be a god?  Can a single christian claim to be a son of god?

  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 57
    Forum posts: 2,385
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @SirAnonymous
    Yes, that is true, but Ephraim and Manasseh were sons of Joseph, who was not designated as a tribe of his own. As a side note, the Book of Mormon is a volume of scripture that gives an account of the remnants of Manasseh after the Babylonian occupation in the 6th century BCE. One of the scientific "disproofs" of the Book of Mormon is that by trace of mitochondrial DNA, it has been demonstrated that indigenous peoples of the Americas do not exhibit Judaic blood, therefore, it is claimed, the account of claims of lineage to the House of Israel are false. However, Manasseh is not issue from Leah, the mother of Judah, but from Rachel, the mother of Joseph, the father of Manasseh. Different mother; different mitochondrial DNA. We must have an independent descendent of Rachel, but do not have one. Yet.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @Soluminsanis
    My thoughts exactly.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @fauxlaw
    I don't recognize the Book of Mormon as Scripture.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @fauxlaw
     We must have an independent descendent of Rachel, but do not have one. Yet.
    Also, this is a tacit admission that there is no proof for the Book of Mormon's claims.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 57
    Forum posts: 2,385
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @SirAnonymous
    And who said God stopped talking to man with the Bible, retired and went fishing? Who are we to limit to whom and when God speaks? Argue for your limitations; they're yours.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @fauxlaw
    And who said God stopped talking to man with the Bible, retired and went fishing? Who are we to limit to whom and when God speaks?
    You're reversing the burden of proof. I don't have to prove that the Book of Mormon isn't Scripture. The burden of proof is on the person who claims that it is.
    Argue for your limitations; they're yours.
    This is little more than an ad hominem wrapped in a philosophical reference.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 57
    Forum posts: 2,385
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @SirAnonymous
    there is no proof for the Book of Mormon's claims.
    Oh, but there is; read Moroni 10: 4,5. Hint: it's a similar message, but more detailed, than James 1: 2 -6. I'll give you another hint: Don't know what's true? Ask God. You don't ask a plumber to solve the legal issue of your property line, do you? Maybe you do. Ask an expert. God qualifies.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 57
    Forum posts: 2,385
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @SirAnonymous
    This is little more than an ad hominem
    A perfect argument of limitation. Well done.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @fauxlaw
     Don't know what's true? Ask God. You don't ask a plumber to solve the legal issue of your property line, do you? Maybe you do. Ask an expert. God qualifies.
    I asked. He said no.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @fauxlaw
    This is little more than an ad hominem
    A perfect argument of limitation. Well done.
    As a matter of fact, we are limited by logic. Not all limitations are invalid.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 57
    Forum posts: 2,385
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @SirAnonymous
    Not all limitations are invalid.
    If we take personal responsibility for all we say and do, and act more angelic, why do we need limitations? If we use our free will to always choose wisely, we need no limitations, do we? That's the goal, and the journey is worth it.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,193
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @fauxlaw
    Being personally responsible and wise is all well and good, but we are still limited by logic. No matter what we do, 2 + 2 will never be 5. Ad hominems will never become valid arguments. The burden of proof cannot be reversed, even if we pretend otherwise. We are limited by logic. Ignoring that will never end well.