re: Netanyahu & Jesus Christ vs POTUS Trump & Robert Mueller - MSM goes nuts on which?

quote:

---

i thought what bibi said was inarticulately stated but i got his point that without force evil will prevail i'm looking at you hitler!

---

I did not realize Hitler prevailed. Do you speak German. What I do know is Jesus Christ is a miracle worker and Genghis Khan was not.

Bibi was subliminally casting doubt on Jesus to the world. Islam is simply a cult developed to fill the void between Judaism and Christianity.

Elaborate on scribal insertion.

quote:

---

I wonder why so many Christians love Israel and the Jews.

---

Yeah!, My wife is a devout Christian and we disagree on that issue often.

My question is, how can an all knowing, Father of all, fair minded Being, have a favorite race?

Who prints the Bible? Who controls the printing and the message today?
Ethiopia
Rome
Jews
Scofield
I read The Gospels. Jesus is my guide and Savior!

quote:

---

I take offense at the notion that Christ has no power to rule for the good of His Church because evil exists, as if Jesus is not sovereign over evil.

---

well except he doesn't seem to keen on doing that does he? in WW1 we had three cousins george V, nicholas ll and kaiser wilhelm who's sovereignty they believed was the ordained will of god, and god sat that one out.

do protestants have no concept of free will, or is saved by the blood of jesus a get out of jail free card, don't bother replying because i don't really care.

the protestant church in the united states is dying couldn't happen to nicer people but it was always the logical conclusion to the make up as you go along protestant reformation!

quote:

---

Elaborate on scribal insertion.

---

Sure. Ok Paul wrote a letter we call the first epistle to the Thessalonians. In chapter 2, it reads…

quote:

---

14For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea. For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, 15who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all mankind 16by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved—so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them at last!

---

Read that text, especially what I bolded, and ask yourself if Paul - who considered himself a devout Jew who worshipped the Jewish God, would have written that? Let me explain to you what the hell this scribal insertion is all about.

First of all in 1 Corinthians, Paul wrote the rulers of the age (archons of this aeon) killed Jesus, not by any Jews (who weren’t in power anyway - the Romans were in charge). Paul actually meant cosmic deities (archons, from the same root as archangels, who lived in the sky in Ephesians 6:12), but for this exercise you can pretend the rulers are Romans, not Jews.

Do you think he would contradict himself and tell the Corinthians the archons killed Jesus while at the same time telling the Thessalonians the Jews killed Jesus? It’s not a real contradiction of Paul, but it is a contradiction of the text, because Paul didn’t write that excerpt of 1 Thessalonians.

Next let’s look at (the Jews) “drove us out”. Drove who out of where? There was no record of Christian persecution in any secular records. The government didn’t even know who the Christians were - they were a very obscure cult. And the Jews under the Roman rule didn’t have the authority to drive anyone out of anything.

Did Paul believe the Jews displease God? He himself was a Jew and he viewed the Jews as God’s chosen people.

But wrath has come upon them at last! Alternately But wrath has come upon them to completion! What is going on there. There was no wrath during the days of Paul. There was wrath though by the Romans when the Jewish war began, and the wrath came upon them to completion when the temple was destroyed. To completion. Get it, the Jews caused the Jewish war which caused the Roman legions to come to Jerusalem, smite the shite out of them, destroy the Jewish temple, and depopulate the city… driving the Jews and Christians alike out of Jerusalem.

And because all that happened in AD70, well after Paul would’ve been dead, we know Paul didn’t write it.

Does that make sense?

quote:

---

well except he doesn't seem to keen on doing that does he?

---

He is very keen on doing that. Ever heard the concept of Christ’s three offices? Prophet, Priest, and King? He is King of kings and Lord of lords (1 Tim. 6:15), and He has been given all authority in Heaven and in Earth (Matt. 28:28), ruling as head of the Church (Col. 1:18), and head over all things for the sake of the Church (Eph. 1:22)

Do they not teach about Christ’s headship and mediatorial kingship in your tradition?

quote:

---

in WW1 we had three cousins george V, nicholas ll and kaiser wilhelm who's sovereignty they believed was the ordained will of god, and god sat that one out.

---

You don’t believe God is sovereign over all things, including evil?

quote:

---

do protestants have no concept of free will

---

I believe in a will that is free to choose according to its own desires. I don’t believe our wills are neutral and able to choose Christ apart from the regenerating work of the Spirit.

quote:

---

or is saved by the blood of jesus a get out of jail free card, don't bother replying because i don't really care.

---

I don’t reply to bad theological posts just for the sake of the one I respond to. You are anti-Protestant but don’t understand what we believe. It would be better for you to take some time to ask questions before criticizing my theology, especially since you seem to be ignorant of many things the Bible teaches.

quote:

---

the protestant church in the united states is dying couldn't happen to nicer people

---

The wishy-washy ones that refuse to teach sin and salvation exclusively through Christ alone and value His worship as a solemn affair sure are struggling these days, but my church has been booming. We had more members join last year than in any single year in recent history.

quote:

---

but it was always the logical conclusion to the make up as you go along protestant reformation!

---

My church is confessional. We certainly don’t make anything up as we go, but are bound by the Scriptures.

quote:

---

Does that make sense?

---

It is certainly understandable that someone can come to that surface conclusion, yes. But I think it lacks a broader understanding of the overall Pauline record, and the Gospel itself.

quote:

---

Read that text, especially what I bolded, and ask yourself if Paul - who considered himself a devout Jew who worshipped the Jewish God, would have written that?

---

Yes, and here is why. First Paul describes himself as a Jew and Pharisee, and expresses on many occasions his love for his people. This is not uncommon. Remember Paul was called set apart to preach the word to the gentiles (Galatians, Romans, Ephesians, 1 Timothy, and most emphatically Acts 9:15). The historical record points out the division of the church around the time of Christ in overwhelming volume. In fact there is more archeological record of this than any event of its time. Remember Paul called out his contemporaries Peter and John for such behavior. Paul had a unique mission, to not only to evangelize the gentiles but to graft graft them in with Christ accepting Jews. How else would these people consider themselves? Until Christ there was no Christian. Paul at this point no longer a "traditional" Jew. He is messianic. Paul also rightly pointed out over his epistles that the fulfillment of Christ rendered the law useless (Galatians,Romans, 2 Corinthians Phillipians). When Paul says “the Jews” in 1 Thess 2:15, he does not necessarily mean all Jews everywhere, the Jewish people as a whole, or Judaism as a religion. Think of how we refer to the Israeli government as the Jews today. Paul frequently uses broad ethnic labels to refer to specific hostile factions ie "the circumcision Party"-Galatians, "false brothers" - 2 Corinthians, and "the Jews"-Acts to name a few. Paul despised the exact theological elitism of educated Jews that Jesus did.

quote:

---

Do you think he would contradict himself and tell the Corinthians the archons killed Jesus while at the same time telling the Thessalonians the Jews killed Jesus?

---

I don't see this as a contradiction. This actually meshes with the gospel very nicely. We see the same overlap from Jesus in Luke and John. We also see it from peter and James. The NT language uses archons fluidly to describe cosmic, spiritual, political and human power. This is Paul's (and Biblical) worldview. Spiritual forces influence human position. it is a common theme throughout the entire Bible.

Next let’s look at (the Jews) “drove us out”. Drove who out of where?
Within context Paul is most likely referring to his experience in Theselonica in Acts 17. He was after all writing to that church, so they would have contextual understanding. He also experienced similar in Damascus, 2 Corinthians:11, which has an authorship of 5 years prior to this. needless to say, Paul, as well as his compatriots had been chased away by traditional Jewish factions throughout the NT.

quote:

---

And because all that happened in AD70, well after Paul would’ve been dead, we know Paul didn’t write it.

---

Not necessarily. However this is the most powerful argument for scribal insertion. However if we look at the full corpus of Paul's work, we see several options. Romans 1:18 the "wrath of God is being revealed..." The Greek eis telos does not necessarily mean finally in the context we understand it in English. It can also mean continually, fully, or to the utmost. The ancient Greek and Hebrew words are much more rich with connotation in context.This view can be found in 1 Thess 1:10, Romans 2:5, and Galatians 1:8-9 as well. In addition he could be alluding to the severe famine of the 40's (Gal 2 and Romans 15 which also allow us to conclude he was not talking of the fall of the temple) widespread political unrest, violence between Jewish factions, or Roman crackdowns on the Jews. This most wholly fits what Paul's worldview seems to be. Vocabulary, tone, and argument structure all support Pauline authorship.

quote:

---

But I think it lacks a broader understanding of the overall Pauline record, and the Gospel itself.

---

If you presuppose it was all written by Paul and if you presuppose Paul’s letters and the gospels are all historically accurate and divinely inspired from the get go, then you can’t fairly analyze it and determine what is most likely based on the evidence.

The truth is that Paul wrote half a decade before the very first mention of a historical Jesus was ever recorded (Ignatius of Antioch). Paul (and the Pillars and all Christians) believed in the celestial model of Jesus, and most of them believed Jesus was killed by archons in heaven by crucifixion (1 Cor 2 and Ephesians 6:12) or was killed as a sacrifice in the heavenly temple not made with human hands (Hebrews 9).

quote:

---

Galatians, Romans, Ephesians, 1 Timothy, and most emphatically Acts 9:15

---

1 Timothy is 2nd century pseudepigrapha and Acts is pure fiction. In Romans and Galatians, Paul expressed hope for Israel and doesn’t use a blanket “the Jews” in a derogatory or judgmental manner.

quote:

---

The historical record points out the division of the church around the time of Christ in overwhelming volume. In fact there is more archeological record of this than any event of its time. Remember Paul called out his contemporaries Peter and John for such behavior.

---

What do have at “the time of Christ”? Assuming 30-ish CE? Anything? I’m not aware of a historical record contemporary with that period. We have the epistles of Paul which are traditionally dated to the 50s but they could’ve been in the 20s. We just don’t know for sure.

quote:

---

Paul had a unique mission, to not only to evangelize the gentiles but to graft graft them in with Christ accepting Jews. How else would these people consider themselves?

---

Paul viewed his theology as the “correct” form of Judaism. He wasn’t setting out to create a new religion. He was a Jew, and was sympathetic to “the Jews” everywhere in his letters except in the subject verses 14-16 where he states the wrath has come upon the Jews to completion, without any words of lament or sympathy.

quote:

---

Paul at this point no longer a "traditional" Jew. He is messianic.

---

There were messianic Israelites going back 1000 years before Paul, and a huge prominent group of messianic Jews lived on the edge of the Dead Sea. They left a treasure trove of scrolls that were found and recently translated. You might have heard about them.

quote:

---

When Paul says “the Jews” in 1 Thess 2:15, he does not necessarily mean all Jews everywhere, the Jewish people as a whole, or Judaism as a religion

---

I disagree and don’t know how you can say that because he doesn’t specify.

quote:

---

I don't see this as a contradiction. This actually meshes with the gospel very nicely. We see the same overlap from Jesus in Luke and John. We also see it from peter and James. The NT language uses archons fluidly to describe cosmic, spiritual, political and human power. This is Paul's (and Biblical) worldview. Spiritual forces influence human position. it is a common theme throughout the entire Bible.

---

You’re making the mistake again of assuming univocality. You’re starting with a conclusion, and then attempting to justify it with biblical apologies. Paul himself (the seven “undisputed” Pauline epistles and even the pseudapigraphical letters that align with him - Ephesians and Colossians) never once refers to a human as an archon. Paul is very specific about the powers and princes and rulers that they are very powerful heavenly beings. Gospel authors, writing an allegorical myth, puts Jesus on earth and puts the ones who kill him as human authorities (Romans) but not the Pharisees or Sadducees or any Jew. Jesus wasn’t killed for blasphemy or any Jewish crime, but a crime against Rome in the gospel tall tales.

You’re absolutely correct about the archons influencing humans on earth though. In Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and Psalm 82 we see that God has given his sons each a people group to lord over, and all those near eastern peoples believed their king channeled the divine protector deity - or archons as the Greeks called them. Some went so far as to say the king was the incarnate fleshly representative on earth of the deity, and so the king was divine. We were all taught in school that the Egyptians believed the Pharoah to be a god. They forgot to mention that the neighboring people - the Israelites - also believed their king to be divine… they called their king the messiah, or anointed one. David was a messiah, Solomon, Hezekiah, Josiah… all messiahs.

Do you think it is likely Paul meant the human rulers - the kings of the earth - killed Jesus? Would it be plausible for the Roman emperor with the help of the kings outside of the empire to have crucified Jesus? Paul - the real Paul - wrote that the emperor was put in charge by God. There would have been just one human archon over the empire. Why use Archontones in the plural?

If you would like to learn, have a peak at the gospel of Jesus called the Ascension of Isaiah, an apocryphal gospel found in Egypt. In it, Jesus is explicitly killed in the firmament by the spirit beings - the archons. That, or one very similar, had to have been Paul’s gospel he talks about.

quote:

---

Next let’s look at (the Jews) “drove us out”. Drove who out of where? Within context Paul is most likely referring to his experience in Theselonica in Acts 17

---

Ok. Let’s assume you’re right for a second. Now what would have happened to those Jews in Thessalonika for them to experience the wrath coming upon them to completion? There’s no record of the Jews in Thessalonika receiving wrath to completion during the days of Paul. In acts 17 Paul is actually let go by the authorities, and the brothers (all of Jesus’ literal biological brothers of the virgin Mary ) sent them away. Did you read and comprehend Acts 17? Does your hypothesis still hold water?

quote:

---

Not necessarily. However this is the most powerful argument for scribal insertion. However if we look at the full corpus of Paul's work, we see several options. Romans 1:18 the "wrath of God is being revealed..." The Greek eis telos does not necessarily mean finally in the context we understand it in English. It can also mean continually, fully, or to the utmost. The ancient Greek and Hebrew words are much more rich with connotation in context.This view can be found in 1 Thess 1:10, Romans 2:5, and Galatians 1:8-9 as well. In addition he could be alluding to the severe famine of the 40's (Gal 2 and Romans 15 which also allow us to conclude he was not talking of the fall of the temple)

---

Or, maybe the thing that makes the most sense is the most likely. There’s only one thing that happened between the days of Paul and the third and fourth centuries that our earliest epistle manuscripts copies date to that had 1) Jews being driven out and 2) Jews experienced wrath to completion. That was the temple destruction and subsequent depopulation of Jews and Christians from the Jerusalem. Less likely, though possible, it could be referring to the Bar Kokhba revolt and subsequent banning of Jews and rebuilding and renaming the city Aelia Capitolina and building of the temple of Jupiter on the Temple Mount. Either way, the wrath was after Paul would’ve been dead.

That’s my take on it. Could I be wrong about some things? Absolutely. But I believe what I believe because I am convinced by the evidence that it is the most likely thing to have happened.

ETA: that 1 Thess 2:14-16 is a scribal insertion was not my idea. This is the majority view of secular scholars - including the ones I like and the ones I don’t like.

This sounds like a tag team match put together by Vince McMahon, except everyone know he hates tag teams.