Zèálotry, Religion and the Historical Aspect

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

I wanted to pull this off the Deuteronomy thread since there is a good flow going on there. I hope that no one minds.

Jul 28, 2012 7:36:13 GMT -5 trevorw2539 said:

Reply 229. May I offer the full quote.

Taking the Greek word zelotes in Acts 22:3 and Galatians 1:14 of the New Testament to mean a 'Zealot' with capital Z (the earliest Greek manuscripts are uncials or all capital letters), an article[11] by Mark R. Fairchild suggests that Paul the Apostle may have been a Zealot, which might have been the driving force behind his persecution of the Christians (see stoning of Saint Stephen) before his conversion to Christianity, and his incident at Antioch even after his conversion.

While most English translations of the Bible render this Greek word as the adjective "zealous", the word is a noun meaning 'adherent, loyalist, enthusiast; patriot, zealot'. A 'Zealot' with capital Z, however, would suggest a member of the particular Zealots, the group that emerged in Jerusalem ca. AD 6 according to Josephus, see above. In the two cited verses Paul literally declares himself as one who is loyal to God, or an ardent observer of the Law, but see also Antinomianism in the NT. This does not necessarily prove Paul was revealing himself as a Zealot. A translation (the Modern King James Version of Jay P. Green) renders it as 'a zealous one'. Two modern translations (Jewish New Testament and Alternate Literal Translation) render it as 'a zealot'. The Unvarnished New Testament (1991) renders Galatians 1:14 as "...being an absolute zealot for the traditions...". These translations may not be inaccurate, but it is disputed by those who claim it gives the wrong association with the "Zealots

You are saying Trevor that he was a zealous person this is saying that Paul was overly passionate about his Religion, which anyone can be about any religion or anything really. Zealous is a state of being is what it is really isn’t it? This is what makes some think there is more to the Zeal in this situation though…

www.bible-history.com/archaeology/rome/1-nero-bb.html

The face of the Roman Emperor, Nero. During his reign were the great fire of Rome which he blamed the Christians for, Paul and Peter were martyred at this time. Nero initiated the attack on Jerusalem which ended in the destruction of the city and Temple under Vespasian and finally Titus in 70 AD.

Jul 28, 2012 8:09:41 GMT -5 trevorw2539 said:

Quote:Today, members of some units of the Israel Defense Forces, climb Masada and declare "Masada Shall Not Fall Again", in Hebrew, at their graduation from basic training.


There is an Italian army today. Hardly the same army as the Roman army of 1500-2000 years ago

Trevor, what this proves is that what this is about goes back to the 70 ADs for sure. Italy has existed the entire time while Israel ceased to exist until 1947, creation lead by a Christian army. So the Zealots in Israel right now get to be where they are because of…..

Jul 28, 2012 13:41:12 GMT -5 trevorw2539 said:

Ahamburger Quote. Fast forward to guy named Moe who believed that JC was the messiah, but not in the way this new Abrahamic religion was talking about and viola a religion of zealotry is born based on parts of JC's gospel.

Correct quote should be 'Fast forward to guy named Moe who did not believe that JC was the messiah, even in the way this new Abrahamic religion was talking about and voila a religion of zealotry was not born on parts of JC's Gospel.

Moe claims that the religion was a revelation from God/Allah. Though I admit it's strange it bears a twisted likeness to the Bible.


Muslims do believe that Isa (A.S.) was sent down as a Prophet of Allah (God), but he (Jesus) is not God or Lord, nor the son of God. Muslims do not believe that Isa (A.S.), also known as Jesus by Christians and others, is dead or was ever crucified. We believe that he was raised to heaven and is there, and will descend at the appointed time, end all wars, and bring peace to the world. Like Jesus (A.S.), Muhammad (Peace be upon him) is also a Prophet and Messenger. Muhammed (P.B.U.H.) is the last Prophet, though, and there is none after him.

www.islam.tc/prophecies/jesus.html

Actually, while that is true, it’s not the fully story Trevor. It goes a bit more like this..

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

The Quran mentions Jesus twenty-five times, more often, by name, than Muhammad, four times.[2][3] It states that Jesus was born to Mary (Arabic: Maryam) as the result of virginal conception, a miraculous event which occurred by the decree of God (Arabic: Allah). To aid in his ministry to the Jewish people, Jesus was given the ability to perform miracles (such as healing the blind, bringing dead people back to life, etc.), all by the permission of God rather than of his own power. According to the popular opinion and Muslim traditions, Jesus was not crucified but instead, he was raised up by God unto the heavens. This "raising" is understood to mean through bodily ascension.

Many Muslims believe that Jesus will return to earth near the Day of Judgment to restore justice and to defeat Masih ad-Dajjal ("the false messiah", also known as the Antichrist).......[4][5]

So you see the stories aren’t that much different, in fact they’re very similar. So yes, Moe did believe that JC was the messiah, and it is in there that he died, it’s just that he was a martyr and God didn’t let him die, he just raised him to Heaven.

Good Sabbath too all.

[trevorw2539]

Quote.
Trevor, what this proves is that what this is about goes back to the 70 ADs for sure. Italy has existed the entire time while Israel ceased to exist until 1947, creation lead by a Christian army. So the Zealots in Israel right now get to be where they are because of…..

Creation of the State of Israel was by decree (1923) of the League of Nations, and instituted by the UN. (1948). Britain (and France to a certain degree) simply had a mandate to 'administer' the area in the meantime. In fact the 'Christian' army did all it could to stop Jewish immigrants entering Palestine at one time. The Jews themselves actually 'established' and 'confirmed' the State in their victory over invading Arab forces immediately after the declaration of Independence.

Quote. So you see the stories aren’t that much different, in fact they’re very similar. So yes, Moe did believe that JC was the messiah, and it is in there that he died, it’s just that he was a martyr and God didn’t let him die, he just raised him to Heaven.

The stories are completely different,

Jesus is the Messiah to Islam, in Islamic style. Not Christian. You are just trying to combine two irreconcilable doctrines. Either Jesus died, or He did not die.

Quote
Many Muslims believe that Jesus will return to earth near the Day of Judgment to restore justice and to defeat Masih ad-Dajjal ("the false messiah", also known as the Antichrist).......[4][5]

Wonder where that came from. Try Revelations in the Bible.

Just as much as Islam takes much of the bible for its own purposes.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Creation of the State of Israel was by decree (1923) of the League of Nations, and instituted by the UN. (1948). Britain (and France to a certain degree) simply had a mandate to 'administer' the area in the meantime. In fact the 'Christian' army did all it could to stop Jewish immigrants entering Palestine at one time. The Jews themselves actually 'established' and 'confirmed' the State in their victory over invading Arab forces immediately after the declaration of Independence.

Umm.. It started here in 1917 actually.. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

That would be Jewish folk buying the land from the Christians, and if the Nazis would have won do you think that Israel would have been created Independence declared thanks to Christ any way you cut it.

Jesus is the Messiah to Islam, in Islamic style. Not Christian. You are just trying to combine two irreconcilable doctrines. Either Jesus died, or He did not die.

No, Christ is the Messiah in Islam like the OT style, aka the Jewish style...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Age

And again, risen up meaning that he was too good to die. Aka, they got him but COULDN'T kill him for God raised him to heaven.

Wonder where that came from. Try Revelations in the Bible.

Just as much as Islam takes much of the bible for its own purposes.

Yes, try revelations for a while. Another GNOSTIC gospel no doubt. It was wrote at the Church of Armageddon by a Jew most likely, while the Roman Pagan army was trying to crush the Jewish/Christian(Abrahamic) folk.. Seek and you shall find.

Revelations: Truths Revealed
notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=religion&action=display&thread=20797

[trevorw2539]

Aug 6, 2012 1:27:51 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Creation of the State of Israel was by decree (1923) of the League of Nations, and instituted by the UN. (1948). Britain (and France to a certain degree) simply had a mandate to 'administer' the area in the meantime. In fact the 'Christian' army did all it could to stop Jewish immigrants entering Palestine at one time. The Jews themselves actually 'established' and 'confirmed' the State in their victory over invading Arab forces immediately after the declaration of Independence.

Umm.. It started here in 1917 actually.. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

That would be Jewish folk buying the land from the Christians, and if the Nazis would have won do you think that Israel would have been created Independence declared thanks to Christ any way you cut it.



No, Christ is the Messiah in Islam like the OT style, aka the Jewish style...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Age

And again, risen up meaning that he was too good to die. Aka, they got him but COULDN'T kill him for God raised him to heaven.

Wonder where that came from. Try Revelations in the Bible.

Just as much as Islam takes much of the bible for its own purposes.

Yes, try revelations for a while. Another GNOSTIC gospel no doubt. It was wrote at the Church of Armageddon by a Jew most likely, while the Roman Pagan army was trying to crush the Jewish/Christian(Abrahamic) folk.. Seek and you shall find.

Revelations: Truths Revealed
notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=religion&action=display&thread=20797

Creation of the State of Israel was by the League of Nations.
The Balfour Declaration was one of intent by a British politician. Why? Could it be the influence that the Zionists held in this country. Both financially and politically.
This is only my opinion but I believe the Balfour Declaration was only influential because it was by a British politician from a country which, at the time, was powerfully influential in the world. The Jews held similar power in the USA. And still do.

Don't understand your 'Jews buying land from Christians'. The land belonged to the Arabs and Jews.

Christ might be like the Messiah OT style. I said Christian style. See the Gospels.


Revelations. I prefer the Bible statement that John had the vision on the Isle of Patmos. At least that is in writing, not some speculation about an unknown Jew at some unknown time at Megiddo.

Apart from the messages to the churches I have never really studied the book of Revelations as it is open to many interpretations. Mine would be no better than many others. So I suppose it could, in a way, be called 'gnostic'.

[dothedd]

LOVE IT!



dot

[trevorw2539]

Ahamburger Quote
You are saying Trevor that he was a zealous person this is saying that Paul was overly passionate about his Religion, which anyone can be about any religion or anything really. Zealous is a state of being is what it is really isn’t it? This is what makes some think there is more to the Zeal in this situation though…

www.bible-history.com/archaeology/rome/1-nero-bb.html

My reply
I was saying nothing. Just pointing out a different way of looking at zelotes/Zealots. What the website has to do with it I don't know. The quote you use throws two separate fact into one statement. Nero did not destroy Jerusalem because of the Christians, but the Jewish revolt. Most Christians had withdrawn from Jerusalem before this.
While Nero initiated the attack on Jerusalem, the final blame is in the court of Vespasian. In AD68 there was a civil war in Rome following the 'suicide' of Nero, 3 Emperors ruled for a very short time each before Vespasian took the position. He could have called off the seige, but didn't.

Quote
The Quran mentions Jesus twenty-five times, more often, by name, than Muhammad, four times.[2][3] It states that Jesus was born to Mary (Arabic: Maryam) as the result of virginal conception, a miraculous event which occurred by the decree of God (Arabic: Allah). To aid in his ministry to the Jewish people, Jesus was given the ability to perform miracles (such as healing the blind, bringing dead people back to life, etc.), all by the permission of God rather than of his own power. Jesus was not crucified but instead, he was raised up by God unto the heavens. This "raising" is understood to mean through bodily ascension.

Many Muslims believe that Jesus will return to earth near the Day of Judgment to restore justice and to defeat Masih ad-Dajjal ("the false messiah", also known as the Antichrist).......[4][5]

Quote from above. 'According to the popular opinion and Muslim traditions,'. Exactly.

My reply
Anyone who has read the Quran cannot help but notice that much of what is in the Bible is copied and altered for Islamic purposes. In these days we call it plagiarism.
In exchanging views with Muslims I have been told that the world was created by Allah a Muslim world. Which would be a great surprise to the Sumerians, Akkadians, Egyptians, Babylonians, etc. etc. etc.

I have tried the website again that you gave me. It seems to be from a History website that requires conditions I am not prepared to follow, and still do not have the video anyway. I have read reports on the series of programmes. It seems that they were entertaining, but with great reservations as to the archaeological findings, both from scholars and archaeologists.
One thing I have learnt over the years is that any TV programme has to be instructive and entertaining. Discerning the facts from the entertainment is not always easy.

You cannot reconcile Islam, Judaism and Christianity without performing grammatical, verbal and doctrinal gymnastics. Even then you will fall of the trampoline.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Aug 6, 2012 12:51:07 GMT -5 dothedd said:

LOVE IT!



dot

Thanks Dot!

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Sorry it took a while to get back here Trevor...

Creation of the State of Israel was by the League of Nations.
The Balfour Declaration was one of intent by a British politician. Why? Could it be the influence that the Zionists held in this country. Both financially and politically.
This is only my opinion but I believe the Balfour Declaration was only influential because it was by a British politician from a country which, at the time, was powerfully influential in the world. The Jews held similar power in the USA. And still do.

Don't understand your 'Jews buying land from Christians'. The land belonged to the Arabs and Jews.

I understand it was by the league of Nations, these were all what again? Ah yes, Christian Armies... The Balfour Declaration it's about British Palestine, land that the Ottoman Empire controlled before ww1. Yes it has LOTS to do with Zionism, that's what I'm saying.

Christ might be like the Messiah OT style. I said Christian style. See the Gospels.

All Abrahamic Scripture points to that fact.

I was saying nothing. Just pointing out a different way of looking at zelotes/Zealots

Yes exactly you were saying that Paul was Zealous or a Zealot. What does it have to do with the link about the burning of Rome?

Nero did not destroy Jerusalem because of the Christians, but the Jewish revolt.

The burning of Rome was pinned on the Christians aka the Jewish folk, so this was all part of the Jewish revolt. Paul was Martyr because of the fire of Rome as being part of the Jewish/Christian revolt.

Anyone who has read the Quran cannot help but notice that much of what is in the Bible is copied and altered for Islamic purposes. In these days we call it plagiarism.
In exchanging views with Muslims I have been told that the world was created by Allah a Muslim world. Which would be a great surprise to the Sumerians, Akkadians, Egyptians, Babylonians, etc. etc. etc.

Weird, almost like it's based on the Gospel of JC and the OT. Allah is God the way Abraham and JC talk about God. Muslims are just zealous about it all and think everyone has to be Muslim, just like some Christain..

You are free to believe what you want, however, it's actually not that hard to see the lines of it all, you even said so yourself that the Quan seems plagiarizer. Marginalize the finds that have been discovered as a TV show if you want, however, archeology has been one of the biggest ways that we have discovered our true past. They have it traced from the caves all the way to Pompeii before Mount Vesuvius erupted, and that place is encased in that historical time fame as well.

[ednaveitch]

Good morning Ahamburger and Trevor,

I have enjoyed reading your discussion.

[trevorw2539]

Quote.
I understand it was by the league of Nations, these were all what again? Ah yes, Christian Armies... The Balfour Declaration it's about British Palestine, land that the Ottoman Empire controlled before ww1. Yes it has LOTS to do with Zionism, that's what I'm saying.

Reply.
What has Christian armies to do with it. Does that include Japan, China, India (which included Bangladesh, Pakistan Burma), Siam, Persia. Members of the League in 1923.

Quote.
Yes exactly you were saying that Paul was Zealous or a Zealot

Reply.
No. I was not saying that. zealous is an adjective, Zealot is a noun. Two different things. One the description of an attitude, the other the member of a distinct sect. Whatever I may feel favourably about a particular - say political party - does not make me a member of that party.

Quote
The burning of Rome was pinned on the Christians aka the Jewish folk, so this was all part of the Jewish revolt. Paul was Martyr because of the fire of Rome as being part of the Jewish/Christian revolt.

Reply.
It had nothing to do with the Jews. Because many Christians were Jews you link the two.
The Jewish revolt was 2 years later than the Fire and persecution of Christians. In fact the Jewish religion continued to be accepted by the Romans even after the destruction of Jerusalem. Later a Roman Emperor, whose name I forget, distinguished between Jews and Christians by excluding Christians from some Roman/Jewish taxes. Which rather upset the Jews.

Again we have no proof of the death of Paul and Peter in Rome. We only have later writings which tell us that they died. We have no proof that Peter even went to Rome.

I agree that archaeology has revealed the past to us. I have spent time studying the OT in relation to Archaeology and vice versa. However I only accept proven facts. Too many false trails lead into wildernesses. One mans interpretation means little unless proven by acceptable facts.

Quote
All Abrahamic Scripture points to that fact.

Reply
To the crucified, dead and resurrected Messiah? I don't think so.

By the way I realise you have other responsibilities taking your time. Trust your family is well.

[ednaveitch]

I believe as a practicing Christian one must decide for oneself whether to treat verses literally or metaphorically, it is a very broad church with in my opinion one central theme, kindness to others.

In my case I do not feel it is my duty to preach Christianity, just to act as a Christian.

[trevorw2539]

Aug 10, 2012 7:46:19 GMT -5 ednaveitch said:

I believe as a practicing Christian one must decide for oneself whether to treat verses literally or metaphorically, it is a very broad church with in my opinion one central theme, kindness to others.

In my case I do not feel it is my duty to preach Christianity, just to act as a Christian.

Absolutely. Preaching by actions.


Well done is better than well said. Benjamin Franklin

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

What has Christian armies to do with it. Does that include Japan, China, India (which included Bangladesh, Pakistan Burma), Siam, Persia. Members of the League in 1923.

Who were the original members though? Where did all the money for the Zionist movement come from? The League of Nations wasn't started just to create Israel. It was about pushing western(Christian) values around the world.

No. I was not saying that. zealous is an adjective, Zealot is a noun. Two different things. One the description of an attitude, the other the member of a distinct sect. Whatever I may feel favourably about a particular - say political party - does not make me a member of that party.

You're splitting hairs. The fact is that Paul was Zealous about his Jewish past, and it's been documented that he originally was a persecutor of Christianity.

It had nothing to do with the Jews. Because many Christians were Jews you link the two.
The Jewish revolt was 2 years later than the Fire and persecution of Christians. In fact the Jewish religion continued to be accepted by the Romans even after the destruction of Jerusalem. Later a Roman Emperor, whose name I forget, distinguished between Jews and Christians by excluding Christians from some Roman/Jewish taxes. Which rather upset the Jews.

I'm not linking the two. Read the link it's a historical fact that Nero blamed the Jewish Christians for the fires. It was Titus that attacked the Temple there is an arch in Rome that glorifies this the arch of Titus. There was more than one reason for the Revolt.

Again we have no proof of the death of Paul and Peter in Rome. We only have later writings which tell us that they died. We have no proof that Peter even went to Rome.

I agree that archaeology has revealed the past to us. I have spent time studying the OT in relation to Archaeology and vice versa. However I only accept proven facts. Too many false trails lead into wildernesses. One mans interpretation means little unless proven by acceptable facts.

There are lots of facts on this trail. That's why it's a 5 or 6 part series.

To the crucified, dead and resurrected Messiah? I don't think so.

By the way I realise you have other responsibilities taking your time. Trust your family is well.

Points to the figure that is to bring this on...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Age

Thanks for the understanding Trevor, yes my family is well thanks. How's things with you?

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Aug 10, 2012 4:13:18 GMT -5 ednaveitch said:

Good morning Ahamburger and Trevor,

I have enjoyed reading your discussion.

Thank you Edna, I enjoy the discussions.

[trevorw2539]

AHAMBURGER QUOTE.
Who were the original members though? Where did all the money for the Zionist movement come from? The League of Nations wasn't started just to create Israel. It was about pushing western(Christian) values around the world.

Now I am confused. Zionist money to promote Christian values. By the time of the League coming into being the centre for Zionist finance had shifted to the USA, who refused to join.
And the founding members include my list.

The League of Nations was formed with the specific purpose of preventing war. The first 20+ Articles of the Treaty (440 articles altogether) form the Covenant of the League. It's purpose was to prevent future wars. Article 10 requires all members to guarantee political independence and security of territory of each member. It also required members to consult on breaches of the Covenant.
The above was the sticking point which prevented the USA joining.

Quote
You're splitting hairs. The fact is that Paul was Zealous about his Jewish past, and it's been documented that he originally was a persecutor of Christianity.

Not at all. I don't deny his zealous attitude. But he himself admits the change in his life after the Damascus road incident. From being a persecutor of Christ, to being a servant of Christ.


Growing old has its problems but I keep .

[trevorw2539]

Ednaveitch. Hi. My apologies for not greeting you before.

[ednaveitch]

I would love to join in the discussion but I am having difficulty in grasping the general thrust of the debate.

History is my passion.

[trevorw2539]

Aug 11, 2012 11:17:14 GMT -5 ednaveitch said:

I would love to join in the discussion but I am having difficulty in grasping the general thrust of the debate.

History is my passion.

I think our discussion is based more around our different ways of looking at the 'Abrahamic' religions, the difference between Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The interaction between Judaism and Christianity in the NT and early days of the church.
I'm sure Ahamburger will tell you his stand. Mine is that Christianity stands on its own in that it is the only 'branch' which believes in a crucified, dead and resurrected Messiah.

I can see your problem. Our responses to each others postings are random and not always easy to follow.

History comes into things with regard to the Jewish nation, their revolt and their relationship with Rome before and after.
And Rome's reaction to Christianity - Nero's persecution.

If you have any questions about our posts I'm sure Ahamburger and I would be happy to answer. If we don't agree with each other you'll get both sides .

Please feel free to join in.

My own interest has been in studying the OT in relation to Archaeolology and Mesopotamian civilisations.

Look forward to hearing from you.

[ednaveitch]

Trevor,

What are your thoughts on the origins of Moses, I believe he was Egyptian and not from Canaan, I believe he created Judaism and imposed it on the Israeltes.

[trevorw2539]

Aug 11, 2012 14:41:36 GMT -5 ednaveitch said:

Trevor,

What are your thoughts on the origins of Moses, I believe he was Egyptian and not from Canaan, I believe he created Judaism and imposed it on the Israeltes.

If we take the History of the Hebrews as written in Exodus we know that Moses was decended from a 'Canaanite' family. I say 'Canaanite' because people so often forget that Moses ancestors had been in Egypt 400 years before he was born. We read he was brought up in Pharoahs household as a prince. This would certainly influence his attitudes.
However he spent many years in the wilderness under nomadic conditions and learnt the way of desert living before returning to Egypt.
Certainly there are traces of Egyptian practices and symbols in the life of Israel.
The real question is this. If, as Exodus tells us, the Hebrews were slaves to the Egyptians, or even servants, would they follow an 'ex-Egyptian' prince into an unknown future. What did they really know of Abraham and God's promises after 400 years. That's a long time even for family handdown 'stories'.
If Moses were recognised as a Hebrew they might be more likely to follow.
I don't think Moses would be able to impose 'Judaism' unless the people were willing to follow him.

Now I'm going to say something which may surprise you. Apart from Monotheism the Hebrew religion was little different to a mixture of religions around them. And even a form of monotheism was practised by one Pharoah, though ceased when he died. Most of the commandments were already in practise, and the health, food etc regulations in Leviticus and Deuteronomy were already in use by other civilisation.
What I have described is based on the OT account.
We also need to remember that this 'history' was written by Hebrews long after the events. AND THIS IS THE ONLY RECORD WE HAVE. No other evidence of the Exodus exists.

Modern concensus of Bible scholars is that the Exodus is a theological 'story'.
There are several reasons for this but I won't go into them now.

Hope this will not upset you. I have no intention of upsetting anyones faith.

[ednaveitch]

Good evening Trevor, no need to worry abut offending me, my faith is not built on straw.

I do not disagree with much of what you have written, my instinct tells me the stories of Moses national roots were invented to reinforce the " chosen people " claim. Centuries after the events, the Jews did not want to consider their religion as a rejected form of Egyptian monotheism, it hardly added to their claim of uniqueness.

Like Freud( Moses and Monotheism), I believe an exiled Moses brought a tribe of monotheists( Atons leftovers) into Canaan, and converted by force the polytheistic tribes of Israel. History was altered just a tad to reinforce the Jewish claim as the chosen people.

[trevorw2539]

I have no reason to disagree with you as we do not really know. The current belief is that the Israelites actually 'invaded' the land reasonably peacefully. What we do know is that from the beginning of monarchy in Israel we do have proof of their occupation. Much of the books of 'history' are reasonably accurate as proved by archaeology. People, battles and events recorded in the Bible are recorded on the palace walls of Babylonian, Assyrian and Egyptian Emperors. And often these walls provide greater insight into Bible reports. It's interesting to see history come alive.
The only thing we have in the Torah that are proveable are the places such as Ur, Nineveh etc which were lost to history until 'dug up'.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Now I am confused. Zionist money to promote Christian values. By the time of the League coming into being the centre for Zionist finance had shifted to the USA, who refused to join.
And the founding members include my list.

All of the money that the Jewish bankers made started as Christian monarchy money. Old man Rothschild started out in the Ghetto and worked his way into the house of lords. It's happen over and over like that throughout history, all the way back to Rome. The only difference is, just as you say, buy the time antisemitism swept Europe in the late 1900's the USA was going strong; and they had enough influence to convince the monarchy to let them buy a little chunk of land in their newly acquired land in Palestine.

The League of Nations was the British, French, and Germanic Empires and all their colonies. That would be considered Christian .

Not at all. I don't deny his zealous attitude. But he himself admits the change in his life after the Damascus road incident. From being a persecutor of Christ, to being a servant of Christ

Exactly, but he was apparently accused and martyred for burning Rome. The original point we were discussing from the thread the conversation started on was if Christ had apostle that were Zealots, and if this lead to the Gnostic(Christian) way of life.

I think our discussion is based more around our different ways of looking at the 'Abrahamic' religions, the difference between Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The interaction between Judaism and Christianity in the NT and early days of the church.
I'm sure Ahamburger will tell you his stand. Mine is that Christianity stands on its own in that it is the only 'branch' which believes in a crucified, dead and resurrected Messiah.

I agree about the conversation. I will add that I see the Religions as individuals, however, there is something about Holy Trinity.

[trevorw2539]

The League of Nations was formed with the specific purpose of preventing war. The first 20+ Articles of the Treaty (440 articles altogether) form the Covenant of the League. It's purpose was to prevent future wars. Article 10 requires all members to guarantee political independence and security of territory of each member. It also required members to consult on breaches of the Covenant.
The above was the sticking point which prevented the USA joining.

The League of Nations had no religious leanings. It was set up for the above reason.

Ahamburger quote

All of the money that the Jewish bankers made started as Christian monarchy money. Old man Rothschild started out in the Ghetto and worked his way into the house of lords. It's happen over and over like that throughout history, all the way back to Rome. The only difference is, just as you say, buy the time antisemitism swept Europe in the late 1900's the USA was going strong; and they had enough influence to convince the monarchy to let them buy a little chunk of land in their newly acquired land in Palestine.

Until 1948 the land was still Arab land. Up till then Jews had been buying large chunks of it, often at inflated prices.
As to convincing the monarchy? I don't understand. Britain has a constitutional monarchy. The Queen or reigning monarch has no power to authorise such purchases. This has been so for centuries, though complete neutrality in political matters really came into force at the beginning of Victorias reign.

Ahamburger quote

Exactly, but he was apparently accused and martyred for burning Rome. The original point we were discussing from the thread the conversation started on was if Christ had apostle that were Zealots, and if this lead to the Gnostic(Christian) way of life.


I cannot see how you equate Zealots with Gnosticism. The Zealots stuck rigidly to the Torah while Gnosticism looks for hidden meanings in writings. Diametrically opposed regimes.

Neither can I see how you call Paul a Zealot. 1 Cor. 15. Eph. 2. Phil. 3. 8-12. Zealous - ardent - yes. A Zealot - no.

Good to talk to you. Take care.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

The League of Nations had no religious leanings. It was set up for the above reason.

Except for the fact that they consider themselves Christian countries. That's what we are talking about, if the countries that helped the Jewish people establish Israel were "Christan" countries.

Until 1948 the land was still Arab land. Up till then Jews had been buying large chunks of it, often at inflated prices. As to convincing the monarchy? I don't understand. Britain has a constitutional monarchy. The Queen or reigning monarch has no power to authorise such purchases

In 1917 they did.. The British Empire didn't start to dissolved till about 1921 and this was a part of it..

Balfour Declaration
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

The Balfour Declaration (dated 2 November 1917) was a letter from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.[1]

The "Balfour Declaration" was later incorporated into the Sèvres peace treaty with Turkey and the Mandate for Palestine. The original document is kept at the British Library.

I cannot see how you equate Zealots with Gnosticism. The Zealots stuck rigidly to the Torah while Gnosticism looks for hidden meanings in writings. Diametrically opposed regimes.

Neither can I see how you call Paul a Zealot. 1 Cor. 15. Eph. 2. Phil. 3. 8-12. Zealous - ardent - yes. A Zealot - no.

Good to talk to you. Take care.

I don't understand how you can't? I know you know that Simon the Zealot was an apostle. Thomas the apostle was also a zealot and the Gnostics look for meaning in his writings about JC. Christ and the apostles read from the Torah, it wasn't until after JC died the the Gospel of JC really started to spread. The gospel of JC is based off the Torah, and another apostle of JC's started this right?

Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_Orthodox_Church_of_Alexandria

Mark the Evangelist
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Mark_the_Evangelist

Since we know that JC is in the Quran and that it Islam originated in the same area that Christianity did. I would say it's not far fetched to think that Moe was a Gnostic, before he wrote the Quarn.

Good chatting with you as well.. Good Sabbath to you.

[trevorw2539]

Aug 17, 2012 23:43:04 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

The League of Nations had no religious leanings. It was set up for the above reason.

Except for the fact that they consider themselves Christian countries. That's what we are talking about, if the countries that helped the Jewish people establish Israel were "Christan" countries.


Reply I'm not aware that Japan, China , Persia etc were Christian countries and they were founding members and members in 1923.
'The drafting history of the Covenant of the League reveals that a number of concerted attempts were made to incorporate within the text some reference to guarantees of religious freedom. Although these attempts were ultimately unsuccessful they paved the way for the Minorities Treaties that were to follow'


In 1917 they did.. The British Empire didn't start to dissolved till about 1921 and this was a part of it..

Balfour Declaration
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

Reply

TheBritish Empire has nothing to do with it. The Monarch had no right to interfere with the working of Parliament from about the 17th century, though it really didn't fully cease till the start of
Queen Victoria's reign. And that was a century earlier.

I cannot see how you equate Zealots with Gnosticism. The Zealots stuck rigidly to the Torah while Gnosticism looks for hidden meanings in writings. Diametrically opposed regimes.

Neither can I see how you call Paul a Zealot. 1 Cor. 15. Eph. 2. Phil. 3. 8-12. Zealous - ardent - yes. A Zealot - no.

Good to talk to you. Take care.

I don't understand how you can't? I know you know that Simon the Zealot was an apostle. Thomas the apostle was also a zealot and the Gnostics look for meaning in his writings about JC. Christ and the apostles read from the Torah, it wasn't until after JC died the the Gospel of JC really started to spread. The gospel of JC is based off the Torah, and another apostle of JC's started this right?

Reply

A Zealot was a member of a reactionary Jewish sect that stuck rigidly to the Torah. They did not look for hidden meanings. They KNEW what the Torah said. Jesus knew what the Torah said and quoted it many times.

Gnosticism' is even more ancient that Christianity. It took up Christianity as a source of 'hidden meanings' when it came along.
As you are aware the Gospel of Thomas is a Gnostic Gospel I don't accept so I won't comment.

Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_Orthodox_Church_of_Alexandria

Mark the Evangelist
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Mark_the_Evangelist

Reply

I don't know why the two references above are quoted. If you want to go into 'Mark the Evangelist' that is a long subject.
Who was 'Mark the Evangelist'? Is the Coptic Orthodox Church traditions correct? If Mark the Evangelist is St Mark, the writer of the Gospel, and both are Mark cousin of Barnabas then we have the problem of Mark being in Alexandria at the same time he was moving around at Pauls side in Asia and Rome. And I don't really want to get entangled in that.







Since we know that JC is in the Quran and that it Islam originated in the same area that Christianity did. I would say it's not far fetched to think that Moe was a Gnostic, before he wrote the Quarn.

Good chatting with you as well.. Good Sabbath to you.

Reply.
Mohammed was born in Mecca, full of Persian religious influence and idolatory. According to Islam this was what he wanted to get away from, not study.

[Deleted]

Good morning..

Some threads have become part of my daily reading.. This is certainly one of them.

[trevorw2539]

Aug 18, 2012 4:50:56 GMT -5 @heart2heart said:

Good morning..

Some threads have become part of my daily reading.. This is certainly one of them.

Your welcome Heart2heart, though I suspect this in not what the writer to Timothy intended when he said (KJV) 'study to shew thyself approved of God...'

[Deleted]

Posted by trevorw2539 on Today at 7:37am

Your welcome Heart2heart, though I suspect this in not what the writer to Timothy intended when he said (KJV) 'study to shew thyself approved of God...'

Oh, how well do I know thy truth..

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Reply.
Mohammed was born in Mecca, full of Persian religious influence and idolatory. According to Islam this was what he wanted to get away from, not study.

Christ is in the Quran. Moe studied the Torah and a scripture of of Christ, which one?... The Byzantine Empire brought a new book/sabbath about Christ that drove him over the edge. What's in Mecca again? The Black stone? Which goes back to Adam right?

I suspect this in not what the writer to Timothy intended when he said (KJV) 'study to shew thyself approved of God...'

Is this judgment?