Zèálotry, Religion and the Historical Aspect

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

I was going to leave it at one point for now but i can't. I luv how you "reject" facts just to try to prove your point and how you are ignoring things like JC had Zealots for apostles.. ;D

This is what I'm talking about.. and what you "reject" trevor.

Gospel of Thomas
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

The Gospel According to Thomas, commonly shortened to the Gospel of Thomas, is a well preserved early Christian, non-canonical sayings-gospel. It was discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in December 1945,
The Coptic language text, the second of seven contained in what modern-day scholars have designated as Codex II, is composed of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.[2]

So there it is again COPTIC.. Do you "reject" that Coptic Christians are in Egypt right now too?

The League of nations was started in 1919 after ww1 by western Empires and their colonies, so yes Christian.. The Treaty of Versailles? You are away that Hong Kong was under British rule until 1997 right?

Also I will let you think that the King George had nothing to do with the British empire(parliament), just so the fact that it was the Balfour Declaration that start the movement to Israel through the mandate of Palestine can be the point that matters here, as it really is the point that were are taking about.

Have a good day.

[trevorw2539]

Aug 19, 2012 2:25:12 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I was going to leave it at one point for now but i can't. I luv how you "reject" facts just to try to prove your point and how you are ignoring things like JC had Zealots for apostles.. ;D

This is what I'm talking about.. and what you "reject" trevor.

Gospel of Thomas
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

The Gospel According to Thomas, commonly shortened to the Gospel of Thomas, is a well preserved early Christian, non-canonical sayings-gospel. It was discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in December 1945,
The Coptic language text, the second of seven contained in what modern-day scholars have designated as Codex II, is composed of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.[2]

So there it is again COPTIC.. Do you "reject" that Coptic Christians are in Egypt right now too?

The League of nations was started in 1919 after ww1 by western Empires and their colonies, so yes Christian.. The Treaty of Versailles? You are away that Hong Kong was under British rule until 1997 right?

Also I will let you think that the King George had nothing to do with the British empire(parliament), just so the fact that it was the Balfour Declaration that start the movement to Israel through the mandate of Palestine can be the point that matters here, as it really is the point that were are taking about.

Have a good day.

Although it is still generally assumed that the "Gospel of Thomas" was first composed in Greek, there is growing evidence that the Coptic Nag Hammadi text is a translation from Syriac. On comparing the Greek fragments from Oxyrhynchus with the fuller Coptic version, Nicholas Perrin argues that the differences can be attributed to the reliance of both on a common Syriac source.[23]

The attribution of the Gospel of Thomas means nothing. A name at the beginning does not automatically mean the person wrote it. Thomas(Greek -twin) Didymus (Aramaic - twin). Judas (Yehuda - Hebrew). Why three names? It would be unusual to have more than one name, and 'surnames' were seldom handed down. Where we read of two, like John Mark, the Mark (Marcus) was Roman and probably used to distinguish him from a family member of the same name. In most other cases people were known as 'Simon-Bar/Ben-Jonah' - (Simon - son of Jonah). 'Miriam-Bat-Aaron' - (Miriam - daughter of Aaron).

The attribution of several books in the Bible is incorrect.

Whether the sayings in Thomas were collected over a period of time or collated in one go is another matter. The final completed book was probably in the 2nd century. Why?

1. It depends a lot on New Testament writings
2. Its probable 2nd century Syriac influence
3. It varies and disagrees with 1st century Gospel writings.
4. It has gnostic 'overtones'.
5. None of the early Christian fathers mention the book until the 3rd century.
6. Many adherents of the book admit it reflects 2nd century 'editing'.

Eusebius - Roman historian 3 cent. calls it 'a heretical book'.

Where do you stand with the other 'Gospels'. Say eg 'The Infancy Gospel of Thomas'. And other infancy gospels.
There are probably 60+ different 'gospels, acts of,epistles to and from, apocalypses of, Ebonite gospels, dialogues with, Passion gospels'. Which are right and which are false? no-one knows.


I have no argument with Coptic Christians being in the 'Egyptian' area. They have been there since 'Mark whoever' founded the Church, whenever in the 1st century. And as you can see I have no doubt that the gospel was in Coptic at Nag Hammadi.
I have 2 Bibles in English and 1 in Greek with English translation, but I know that the original OT was in Hebrew and the full Bible was in Greek.

Quote
The League of nations was started in 1919 after ww1 by western Empires and their colonies, so yes Christian.. The Treaty of Versailles? You are away that Hong Kong was under British rule until 1997 right?

Reply.
What has a small territory like Hong Kong got to do with it?

So China, India, Persia were all Christian? They were founder members of the L of N.

Quote.
Also I will let you think that the King George had nothing to do with the British empire(parliament),

Reply.

The present concept of constitutional monarchy developed in the United Kingdom, where it was the democratically elected parliaments, and their leader, the prime minister, who had become those who exercised power, with the monarchs voluntarily ceding it and contenting themselves with the titular position. In many cases even the monarchs themselves, while still at the very top of the political and social hierarchy, were given the status of "servants of the people" to reflect the new, egalitarian view.

While it IS possible for the Queen to intervene in EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES it is virtually unlikely she would do so politically as this would would be outside her remit. Her title is a Titular one. The above has been in full operation for well over a century, though it started in the 17th century.

I quote facts because they are facts. And I know that one of the disciples was a Zealot. I've never denied it. It's a world of difference between being a member of the Zealot sect, and being zealous for something.

Have a good day.

[trevorw2539]

The League of nations was started in 1919 after ww1 by western Empires and their colonies, so yes Christian.. The Treaty of Versailles? You are away that Hong Kong was under British rule until 1997 right?

The League of Nations respected the rights of other religions and cultures..



Many assume that the “Mandate for Palestine” is a Class “A” mandate, a common but inaccurate assertion that can be found in many dictionaries and encyclopedias, and is frequently used by the pro-Palestinian media and lately by the ICJ. In the Court Advisory Opinion of July 9, 2004, in the matter of the construction of a wall in the “Occupied Palestinian Territory”, the Bench erroneously stated:

Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire. At the end of the First World War, a class [type] “A” Mandate for Palestine was entrusted to Great Britain by the League of Nations, pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 22 of the Covenant...[21][22]

Indeed, Class “A” status was granted to a number of Arab peoples who were ready for independence in the former Ottoman Empire, and only to Arab entities.[23] Palestinian Arabs were not one of these Arab peoples. The "Palestine Royal Report"[24] clarifies this point:

The Mandate [for Palestine] is of a different type from the Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon and the draft Mandate for Iraq. These latter, which were called for convenience “A” Mandates, accorded with the fourth paragraph of Article 22. Thus the Syrian Mandate provided that the government should be based on an organic law which should take into account the rights, interests and wishes of all the inhabitants, and that measures should be enacted “to facilitate the progressive development of Syria and the Lebanon as independent States”. The corresponding sentences of the draft Mandate for Iraq were the same. In compliance with them National Legislatures were established in due course on an elective basis.

avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/leagcov.asp

Based on organic law and rights, interests and wishes of all the inhabitants - to progress as independent states. Arabs not Christians.


Article 22 Paras. 4-5
Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.
Other peoples, especially those of Central Africa, are at such a stage that the Mandatory must be responsible for the administration of the territory under conditions which will guarantee freedom of conscience and religion.....

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations_mandate

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Where do you stand with the other 'Gospels'.

I think they all play a part. My point is that this particular Gospel is what developed outside the Roman Empire, and this is what Moe most likely followed. This is where the Black stone, Zealots as apostles, and other major points that I'm talking about here come into the picture.

What has a small territory like Hong Kong got to do with it?

So China, India, Persia were all Christian? They were founder members of the L of N.

Hong Kong was under British "rule".. Just like India was in 1921, so India would be "Christian" at that point. China was receiving British (Christian money) to help fend off the Japanese in 1921, so that's why they stepped up, and Persia was mandated to the British Empire in 1919(Just as you have fully elaborated on). So again more colonies that went the way their Christian bosses said.

You can argue all you want that the British would have just let the Arabs live like they want, however, I know just how "organically" it went for the natives in Canada once the settlers got west.

Again, on point here though. It was defiantly Christian money and Christian Empires that mandated Israel to the Jewish people. Right?

[trevorw2539]

Aug 25, 2012 17:23:45 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Where do you stand with the other 'Gospels'.

I think they all play a part. My point is that this particular
Gospel is what developed outside the Roman Empire, and this is what Moe most likely followed. This is where the Black stone, Zealots as apostles, and other major points that I'm talking about here come into the picture.

What has a small territory like Hong Kong got to do with it?

So China, India, Persia were all Christian? They were founder members of the L of N.

Hong Kong was under British "rule".. Just like India was in 1921, so India would be "Christian" at that point. You can argue all you want that the British would have just let the Arabs live like they want, however, I know just how "organically" it went for the natives in Canada once the settlers got west.VI (XXII)VI (XXII)(Just as you have fully elaborated on). So again more colonies that went the way their Christian bosses said.VI (XXVI (XXII)








The story around the Black stone is all mythology. It was revered by previous religions and Mohammed appropriated the myth for Islam.

If you believe the other 60+ gospels all played a part, heaven help us. Do you believe the child Jesus killed other children?
Which of the Gospels tell the truth. Several claim to have the true understanding of what Jesus said. Who do you believe?


Quote

From the second century and later come a large number of Christian writings, many of which purport to give an account of what Jesus said and did. These 'apocryphal gospels' vary from novelistic accounts of improbable marvels surrounding Jesus' birth and childhood (especially the Protevangelium of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas) to elaborate discourses on Gnostic cosmology presented as the post-resurrection teaching of Jesus to his disciples (several such were found at Nag Hammadi, notably the Sophia of Jesus Christ). A high percentage of these works are clearly written within the framework of a Gnosticized Christianity (indeed some are Christian adaptations of pagan Gnostic writings /6/), and their portrait of Jesus is tailored accordingly. The difference in tone from first-century Christian writings is thus remarkable, and leaves the historian with a fundamental choice: either he accepts the earlier accounts and so dismisses the 'Gnostic' Jesus as a later perversion, or he alleges a large-scale coverup by 'orthodox' Christianity which successfully suppressed earlier evidence of a Jesus whose magical propensities and esoteric teaching formed the historical basis of the 'Gnostic' version of Christianity-a more authentic version which is now labelled 'heretical' only because it had the misfortune to be the eventual loser in the battle with 'orthodoxy' /7/. This paper proceeds on the assumption that the earlier evidence is to be preferred. This is not to deny, however, that some authentic tradition about Jesus may have been preserved outside the New Testament. This is in fact inherently likely, and scholars have argued that some stories, such as that of the encounter of Jesus in the temple with Levi the Pharisee /8/, or sayings such as the frequently quoted 'Be approved moneychangers' /9/, are likely to have a basis in fact. Such isolated fragments, however, are not a significant contribution to our knowledge of Jesus.
www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth21.html




Where did Nicodemus get the following information? Was he there?

Quote

VI (XXII)



1 When Hell and death and their wicked ministers saw that, they were stricken with fear, they and their cruel officers, at the sight of the brightness of so great light in their own realm, seeing Christ of a sudden in their abode, and they cried out, saying: We are overcome by thee. Who art thou that art sent by the Lord for our confusion? Who art thou that without all damage of corruption, and with the signs (?) of thy majesty unblemished, dost in wrath condemn our power? Who art thou that art so great and so small, both humble and exalted, both soldier and commander, a marvelous warrior in the shape of a bondsman, and a King of glory dead and living, whom the cross bare slain upon it? Thou that didst lie dead in the sepulchre hast come down unto us living and at thy death all creation quaked and all the stars were shaken and thou hast become free among the dead and dost rout our legions. Who art thou that settest free the prisoners that are held bound by original sin and restorest them into their former liberty? Who art thou that sheddest thy divine and bright light upon them that were blinded with the darkness of their sins? After the same manner all the legions of devils were stricken with like fear and cried out all together in the terror of their confusion, saying: Whence art thou, Jesus, a man so mighty and bright in majesty, so excellent without spot and clean from sin? For that world of earth which hath been always subject unto us until now, and did pay tribute to our profit, hath never sent unto us a dead man like thee, nor ever dispatched such a gift unto Hell. Who then art thou that so fearlessly enterest our borders, and not only fearest not our torments, but besides essayest to bear away all men out of our bonds? Peradventure thou art that Jesus, of whom Satan our prince said that by thy death of the cross thou shouldest receive the dominion of the whole world.

2 Then did the King of glory in his majesty trample upon death, and laid hold on Satan the prince and delivered him unto the power of Hell, and drew Adam to him unto his own brightness.



Many of the gospels are simply someone's attempt for notoriety, many are frankly 'unbelievable', many are written by unknown people, with attributions to unknown writers.
For example Gospels of Thomas are not all by the same 'Thomas


Quote.
You can argue all you want that the British would have just let the Arabs live like they want, however, I know just how it went for the natives in Canada once the settlers got west.


If you wish to believe that the countries with Mandates ruled in contravention of the Mandate 'rules', fair enough.
I didn't think the Canadian natives were under Treaty of Versailles mandates.


Quote.

So again more colonies that went the way their Christian bosses said.VI (XXVI (XXII
Neither China or Persia were British Colonies. We retained some influence militarily/politically/tradewise in 'minor' parts of China.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

The story around the Black stone is all mythology. It was revered by previous religions and Mohammed appropriated the myth for Islam.

If you believe the other 60+ gospels all played a part, heaven help us. Do you believe the child Jesus killed other children?
Which of the Gospels tell the truth. Several claim to have the true understanding of what Jesus said. Who do you believe?

The Black stone apparently goes back to Adam, from Adam and Eve. You know that mythical story right? So it's still part of Abraham.

I think that the Gospel of JC is so much bigger than what is presented right now. In time the truth of it all will come out, because lies never hold up and it's all there. It's just a matter of it all coming together now. I believe, I know that a slave religion started in Israel some 5000+ yrs ago, and in the last 2000 yrs because of ONE guy it has gone from a slave religion, to the basis of the major religious on Earth. I know for a fact that conflicts that exist within these religions have engulfed the world,(look at the headlines) just like it says in the Gospel of Thomas.

Quote all the writings you want as a distraction to the points we are talking about. You still haven't disproved that Moe was a follower of Christ before he started Islam, and since the Quarn says that JC is the Messiah I don't know how you will...

If you wish to believe that the countries with Mandates ruled in contravention of the Mandate 'rules', fair enough.
I didn't think the Canadian natives were under Treaty of Versailles mandates.

WOW, that's all I can say about that....

Neither China or Persia were British Colonies. We retained some influence militarily/politically/tradewise in 'minor' parts of China.

Most of Persia(Ottoman Empire at that time) was mandated or given to "allied forces". Again China, all of it, was receiving monies from the Brits, aka Christian monies. Glad to see that we are down to the last couple sticking points here. Honestly, in the end, these last two points don't change the fact that a Christian empire mandated Israel to the Jewish people.

Have a great day Trevor, blessings to you and yours.

[trevorw2539]

Sept 2, 2012 16:36:48 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

The story around the Black stone is all mythology. It was revered by previous religions and Mohammed appropriated the myth for Islam.

If you believe the other 60+ gospels all played a part, heaven help us. Do you believe the child Jesus killed other children?
Which of the Gospels tell the truth. Several claim to have the true understanding of what Jesus said. Who do you believe?

The Black stone apparently goes back to Adam, from Adam and Eve. You know that mythical story right? So it's still part of Abraham.

I think that the Gospel of JC is so much bigger than what is presented right now. In time the truth of it all will come out, because lies never hold up and it's all there. It's just a matter of it all coming together now. I think that the Gospel of JC is so much bigger than what is presented right now. In time the truth of it all will come out, because lies never hold up and it's all there. It's just a matter of it all coming together now. I believe, I know that a slave religion started in Israel some 5000+ yrs ago, and in the last 2000 yrs because of ONE guy it has gone from a slave religion, to the basis of the major religious on Earth. , to the basis of the major religious on Earth.



Quote all the writings you want as a distraction to the points we are talking about. You still haven't disproved that Moe was a follower of Christ before he started Islam, and since the Quarn says that JC is the Messiah I don't know how you will...



WOW, that's all I can say about that....

Neither China or Persia were British Colonies. We retained some influence militarily/politically/tradewise in 'minor' parts of China.

Most of Persia(Ottoman Empire at that time) was mandated or given to "allied forces". Again China, all of it, was receiving monies from the Brits, aka Christian monies. Glad to see that we are down to the last couple sticking points here. Honestly, in the end, these last two points don't change the fact that a Christian empire mandated Israel to the Jewish people.

Have a great day Trevor, blessings to you and yours.

Quote
Most of Persia(Ottoman Empire at that time) was mandated or given to "allied forces". Again China, all of it, was receiving monies from the Brits, aka Christian monies. Glad to see that we are down to the last couple sticking points.

Reply
Persia had already been 'conquered' by the British who defeated the Ottoman Empire troops in 1915? or 1918?

As to China, you have to be joking. Even with other nations having influence in China there was a VAST area untouched by outside influence. China wasn't even a united country at the time.

Quote
The Black stone apparently goes back to Adam, from Adam and Eve. You know that mythical story right? So it's still part of Abraham.

Reply
Don't remember the Bible mentioning it. And Abraham never went within a 1000 miles of it. Wouldn't even know of it. There is no way you can connect 'Adam and Eve', or Abraham, with the Black stone.
You are simply doing what Islam does. Claiming everything for themselves in retrospect.


Quote
I think that the Gospel of JC is so much bigger than what is presented right now. In time the truth of it all will come out, because lies never hold up and it's all there. It's just a matter of it all coming together now. I believe, I know that a slave religion started in Israel some 5000+ yrs ago, and in the last 2000 yrs because of ONE guy it has gone from a slave religion, to the basis of the major religious on Earth.

Reply
Don't understand your 'slave religion'. If it's Judaism, it surely started with Abraham at Haran. The Hebrews reached Canaan around 1200BC, 3200 years ago.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Persia had already been 'conquered' by the British who defeated the Ottoman Empire troops in 1915? or 1918?

Don't understand the question. The Ottoman empire fell. The Allies split it up. The Brits(Christian Empire) Mandated Israel to the Zionists. It's simple really. One thing lead to another ya know? No Christ, no Christian Empires. So by extension, Christ gave his people back their land.

As to China, you have to be joking. Even with other nations having influence in China there was a VAST area untouched by outside influence. China wasn't even a united country at the time

What part of China joined the league of Nations though? Oh ya that's right the part that was receiving monies. Now that it's united, what are they doing? That's right ordaining Catholic priests without the Vatican consent. But the League of Nations and then the UN didn't do anything to spread Christianity around the world though...

Don't remember the Bible mentioning it. And Abraham never went within a 1000 miles of it. Wouldn't even know of it. There is no way you can connect 'Adam and Eve', or Abraham, with the Black stone.
You are simply doing what Islam does. Claiming everything for themselves in retrospect.

I see, you're going to take the ostrich approach on the subject. I'm not doing anything. I'm stating a FACT. Believe what you want, ignorance is bliss my friend. Just like how you "reject" the claim that the Coptic Christians make about the origins of their religion being with St. Mark the apostle.

What about Moe and JC in the Quran? I see you just keep dodging around the subject material here.

Don't understand your 'slave religion'. If it's Judaism, it surely started with Abraham at Haran. The Hebrews reached Canaan around 1200BC, 3200 years ago.

That's simple... EXODUS!!!!!!

Jah come to break downpression,
Rule equality,
Wipe away transgression,
Set the captives free.

Exodus, all right, all right!
Movement of Jah people! Oh, yeah!
Exodus: movement of Jah people! Oh, now, now, now, now!

[trevorw2539]

Sept 3, 2012 14:36:46 GMT -5 trevorw2539 said:

Sept 2, 2012 16:36:48 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

The Black stone apparently goes back to Adam, from Adam and Eve. You know that mythical story right? So it's still part of Abraham.

I think that the Gospel of JC is so much bigger than what is presented right now. In time the truth of it all will come out, because lies never hold up and it's all there. It's just a matter of it all coming together now. I think that the Gospel of JC is so much bigger than what is presented right now. In time the truth of it all will come out, because lies never hold up and it's all there. It's just a matter of it all coming together now. I believe, I know that a slave religion started in Israel some 5000+ yrs ago, and in the last 2000 yrs because of ONE guy it has gone from a slave religion, to the basis of the major religious on Earth. , to the basis of the major religious on Earth.



Quote all the writings you want as a distraction to the points we are talking about. You still haven't disproved that Moe was a follower of Christ before he started Islam, and since the Quarn says that JC is the Messiah I don't know how you will...



WOW, that's all I can say about that....



Most of Persia(Ottoman Empire at that time) was mandated or given to "allied forces". Again China, all of it, was receiving monies from the Brits, aka Christian monies. Glad to see that we are down to the last couple sticking points here. Honestly, in the end, these last two points don't change the fact that a Christian empire mandated Israel to the Jewish people.

Have a great day Trevor, blessings to you and yours.

Quote
Most of Persia(Ottoman Empire at that time) was mandated or given to "allied forces". Again China, all of it, was receiving monies from the Brits, aka Christian monies. Glad to see that we are down to the last couple sticking points.

Reply
Persia had already been 'conquered' by the British who defeated the Ottoman Empire troops in 1915? or 1918?

As to China, you have to be joking. Even with other nations having influence in China there was a VAST area untouched by outside influence. China wasn't even a united country at the time.

Quote
The Black stone apparently goes back to Adam, from Adam and Eve. You know that mythical story right? So it's still part of Abraham.

Reply
Don't remember the Bible mentioning it. And Abraham never went within a 1000 miles of it. Wouldn't even know of it. There is no way you can connect 'Adam and Eve', or Abraham, with the Black stone.
You are simply doing what Islam does. Claiming everything for themselves in retrospect.


Quote
I think that the Gospel of JC is so much bigger than what is presented right now. In time the truth of it all will come out, because lies never hold up and it's all there. It's just a matter of it all coming together now. I believe, I know that a slave religion started in Israel some 5000+ yrs ago, and in the last 2000 yrs because of ONE guy it has gone from a slave religion, to the basis of the major religious on Earth.

Reply
Don't understand your 'slave religion'. If it's Judaism, it surely started with Abraham at Haran. The Hebrews reached Canaan around 1200BC, 3200 years ago.

You claim that Persia was part of the Ottoman empire when it was mandated to Britain. Not so. Britain had already conquered it.
You claim that ALL of China received money from 'Christian' countries. Not so, only the parts that were useful, and which they controlled. Just s small amount compared with the vast country.
The Black stone has more to do with Ishtar and her followers than it does with Adam and Abraham. She was worshipped in Mesopotamia long before either Adam or Abraham were around.

As for Mohammed being a follower of Jesus I haven't commented because I consider the statement ridiculous. That makes Jesus a Moslem, which would be of surprise to him as Islam was still 600 years in the future. It does not concord with his teaching either. But then Islam has done its usual and 'adjusted' things to their viewpoint.
There was no 'slave religion'. Abraham was called by God 600 years before Moses came on the scene. Abraham is known as the father of the Jews. He and his family worshipped God. All Moses did was to give it 'bones'.

The strange thing is that you continue to associate Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Consider these points from the Qu'ran.

Jews and Christians are told to follow their own religious scriptures for guidance.
The Bible should determine whether the Qu'ran is true or not.

But

Mohammed could judge Christians and Jews by the Qu'ran.
If Jews and Christians can follow their own scriptures why does the Qu'ran contradict those scriptures.
This means that Jews and Christians must reject the Qu'ran where it contradicts the Torah or New Testament, or reject the Bible when it contradicts the Qu'ran.
If Jews and Christians do what the Torah and Bible say they then they go against Qu'ran teaching that they should follow the Qu'ran.

??

With that I leave this discussion. Good wishes to you and your family.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Trevor, the reason I have not got back to you until now is because of current events. We can talk about the 1900's later. Muslims believe Jesus was a Muslim, regardless of if you believe it or not. It's part of their faith. You are going to have to accept this point or else there is no point even continuing on with this conversation.

Now, consider everything that we have talked about in this thread regarding the crossover between Gnostic/zealots/and Jewish people. We talked about the book of revelations being of Gnostic origins at one point. You keep denying that all of these religions are interconnected. While everything I have been saying about the tie in with the gospel of Thomas, zealots, JC, Moe and the Koran is happening right in front of your eyes. The cartoon from France today was an interesting touch. Religion is MAN made. That's the whole point my friend. THANK JC!!!

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Wow, I'm glad I forgot to close this window before. I missed that last part fully there Trevor. You can "leave" all you want but I'm not going to let you call me a liar and not respond, that is for sure.

The one thing I have always tried to do in my life is tell the truth and it's usually got me in shit, which I always found weird...

On topic.

Yes, it was a "slip of the tongue" when I said ALL of China. What I meant was ALL of China that was in the League of Nations was receiving monies from Britain.

Again, all I have ever said was that after the War, which the Allies won, the land in the Middle east was Mandated to the Zionists.

Other mandated states were all part of the league of nations because they where now part of a "Christian empire".

The other part of Persia(now Iran) that was part of the League was supplying oil to Britain. AKA MONEY. How do I know this? In the late 40's Europe and the US over though a democratically elected govt that cut the oil supply OFF to Europe. Which had a big part into leading up to where we are now...... So again...

Sept 19, 2012 17:38:28 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Trevor, the reason I have not got back to you until now is because of current events. We can talk about the 1900's later. Muslims believe Jesus was a Muslim, regardless of if you believe it or not. It's part of their faith. You are going to have to accept this point or else there is no point even continuing on with this conversation.

Now, consider everything that we have talked about in this thread regarding the crossover between Gnostic/zealots/and Jewish people. We talked about the book of revelations being of Gnostic origins at one point. You keep denying that all of these religions are interconnected. While everything I have been saying about the tie in with the gospel of Thomas, zealots, JC, Moe and the Koran is happening right in front of your eyes. The cartoon from France today was an interesting touch. Religion is MAN made. That's the whole point my friend. THANK JC!!!

I understand if you're "done" here though. God Blessed America.

[trevorw2539]

Trevor, the reason I have not got back to you until now is because of current events. We can talk about the 1900's later. Muslims believe Jesus was a Muslim, regardless of if you believe it or not. It's part of their faith. You are going to have to accept this point or else there is no point even continuing on with this conversation.

Ahamburger . I have never called you a liar. I have pointed out where I believe you are wrong.


Your quote.
Now, consider everything that we have talked about in this thread regarding the crossover between Gnostic/zealots/and Jewish people. We talked about the book of revelations being of Gnostic origins at one point. You keep denying that all of these religions are interconnected. While everything I have been saying about the tie in with the gospel of Thomas, zealots, JC, Moe and the Koran is happening right in front of your eyes. The cartoon from France today was an interesting touch. Religion is MAN made. That's the whole point my friend. THANK JC!!!

I am well aware what the Moslems 'believe', having read the Qu'ran. The fact that they 'believe' it does not make it so. Much as Britons liked to believe they ruled the world in Victorias time, it was simply not true.

These 3 religions are not 'interconnected'. That Islam has fabricated its own religion from its plagiarisation of the Torah and Bible does not 'interweave' it with either of the other, whatever they may think. In fact, it does just the opposite. Either one or the other is true. Can you interweave/interconnect truth with a lie. Either Jesus was Christianities Resurrected Son/Messiah, or he was Islams 'translated' Prophet. Either Abraham was a Hebrew, Father of the Jews through Isaac, or he was an early Moslem, father of the Arabs through Ishmael, but necessarily Islam 2000 years later.

I really came on to say that if you feel I've called you a liar, I'm sorry. I've been back through some of our posts and frankly I don't understand where you are coming from so it is better I leave.
Good luck to you and your family.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Hi Trevor,

I wish you would stick around. The only reason I thought u were calling me a liar was because u left.

U see exactly what my point is. Aside from one thing, how r they not interconnected?

The Muslims go back to JC. He had Zealots for disciples, Gnostic writings go back to around the time of Christ. However, they were followers of Christ. It was Moe that united these people under the banner of Islam and made up his own bible.

So while he was combating the Romans for what he seen as idol worship, he created a Religion based on following himself, a false profit. We know this because JC is the messiah and if Islam is truly in the line of Abraham then the one true profit of God is Jesus, not Moe.

JC used the Romans to spread love and the Zealots/gnostics to spread peace, and the two waring sides would always need the traditions of business to pay for their ideals. Those traditions are truly Christ's when it comes right down to it, our beloved rabbi.



I hope you stick around Trevor, God bless you and yours.

Business, freedom, and love bring peace and conquer all!

Libyan protesters oust Benghazi militias
dawn.com/2012/09/22/libyan-protesters-oust-benghazi-militias/

Libya orders disbanding of 'illegitimate' militia
www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012/09/23/libya-orders-disbanding-of-illegitimate-militias/57829890/1

[trevorw2539]

Sept 24, 2012 1:00:00 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Hi Trevor,

I wish you would stick around. The only reason I thought u were calling me a liar was because u left.

U see exactly what my point is. Aside from one thing, how r they not interconnected?

The Muslims go back to JC. He had Zealots for disciples, Gnostic writings go back to around the time of Christ. However, they were followers of Christ. It was Moe that united these people under the banner of Islam and made up his own bible.

So while he was combating the Romans for what he seen as idol worship, he created a Religion based on following himself, a false profit. We know this because JC is the messiah and if Islam is truly in the line of Abraham then the one true profit of God is Jesus, not Moe.

JC used the Romans to spread love and the Zealots/gnostics to spread peace, and the two waring sides would always need the traditions of business to pay for their ideals. Those traditions are truly Christ's when it comes right down to it, our beloved rabbi.



I hope you stick around Trevor, God bless you and yours.

Business, freedom, and love bring peace and conquer all!

Libyan protesters oust Benghazi militias
dawn.com/2012/09/22/libyan-protesters-oust-benghazi-militias/

Libya orders disbanding of 'illegitimate' militia
www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012/09/23/libya-orders-disbanding-of-illegitimate-militias/57829890/1

This is where I do not understand your reasoning.

Islam and Mohammed came 600 years after Christ so they can only be connected by retrospection by Islam.
The Zealots were virtually wiped out in the wars against Rome. Again 600 years before Christ. So they can't be connected in any way.
Gnosticism is not religion based. Some point back to Plato and look for hidden 'knowledge' in his, and other famous writers, works. Christian Gnosticism is looking for hidden meanings in Christs teaching and Bible writings.
The problem of early Christian teaching was that there was no agreement on teaching and doctrine till centuries later. This led to groups of churches in various areas forming there own 'doctrines' and some of the areas leaned
towards 'gnosticism'. One of these areas was Syria where the Gospel of Thomas was thought to have been compiled. This area also was influenced by Buddhist thought.
It is impossible that Mohammed united these people (Gnostics, Christians and Moslems). Their whole ideas and teachings are irreconcilable.
Islam contradicts Gnosticism by laying emphasis on Jesus' human nature, at the same time rejecting the Christian belief in Jesus' divinity. To Gnostics Jesus was not 'real'. To Islam he was human. To Christians he was Gods' Son.

That the gnostics integrated into Islam was by force or conversion.

I think you will find that what little combat there was between Mohammed and Rome was due to Mohammed trying to bring local tribes into subjection, (battle of Mu'tah), and them asking the Romans (Byzantines) for help. Islam lost that battle.
Not for religious reasons.

Much later, after Mohammeds death, there was much more conflict.

Till Constantine Romans had comparatively little to do with Christianity, though I remember your thoughts about some cave.

As the religions of the world stand there can be no assimilation without dispensing with basic truths. The best that can be done is to accept each has a right to believe in his own way.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Islam and Mohammed came 600 years after Christ so they can only be connected by retrospection by Islam.

Exactly, Moe has created a religion focusing on himself, not Christ, yet he claimed it was... False profit.

The Zealots were virtually wiped out in the wars against Rome. Again 600 years before Christ. So they can't be connected in any way.
Gnosticism is not religion based. Some point back to Plato and look for hidden 'knowledge' in his, and other famous writers, works. Christian Gnosticism is looking for hidden meanings in Christs teaching and Bible writings.

Zealots- Exactly, all but wiped out, some weren't, some continued to follow Christ, some decided that he wasn't the true Messiah.

Gnosticts- Exactly, followers of Christ that roamed the middle east.

The problem of early Christian teaching was that there was no agreement on teaching and doctrine till centuries later. This led to groups of churches in various areas forming there own 'doctrines' and some of the areas leaned
towards 'gnosticism'. One of these areas was Syria where the Gospel of Thomas was thought to have been compiled. This area also was influenced by Buddhist thought.

Exactly, the Gospel of JC is way bigger than just the New Testament. A big point.

It is impossible that Mohammed united these people (Gnostics, Christians and Moslems). Their whole ideas and teachings are irreconcilable.
Islam contradicts Gnosticism by laying emphasis on Jesus' human nature, at the same time rejecting the Christian belief in Jesus' divinity. To Gnostics Jesus was not 'real'. To Islam he was human. To Christians he was Gods' Son.

That the gnostics integrated into Islam was by force or conversion.

Exactly, Islam, Moe's religion, forced the Islamic golden age onto the Middle East and destroyed world trade in about 800 AD.

I think you will find that what little combat there was between Mohammed and Rome was due to Mohammed trying to bring local tribes into subjection, (battle of Mu'tah), and them asking the Romans (Byzantines) for help. Islam lost that battle.
Not for religious reasons.

Much later, after Mohammeds death, there was much more conflict.

Exactly again, Moe wanted to "united" the Middle East because of the "false" Religion the Romans brought about JC(Byzantine). After he died his religion grew and the "Islamic golden age" was upon the Middle East.

Till Constantine Romans had comparatively little to do with Christianity, though I remember your thoughts about some cave.

Except I know that it's in the Bible somewhere that some Roman soldiers were followers of Christ. That's the thing, his teachings were all throughout Rome, and that is why Constantine had to bring it to the forefornt.

Yes we have found caves in Israel that prove "somone" around 30 AD was already working on uniting Rome and Israel through religion.

As the religions of the world stand there can be no assimilation without dispensing with basic truths. The best that can be done is to accept each has a right to believe in his own way.

Exactly and the easiest way that will be accomplished is if all just accept God and get on with it, without a religious zeal about it.

Thanks for sticking around Trevor!

[egginbonce]

wow.....where does anyone accumulate all this info?.........................I dunno if it'd help me along, were I better informed(about ANYTHING), but it adds to ones street cred .......... ;D ;D ;D

[trevorw2539]

Sept 26, 2012 0:59:30 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Islam and Mohammed came 600 years after Christ so they can only be connected by retrospection by Islam.

Exactly, Moe has created a religion focusing on himself, not Christ, yet he claimed it was... False profit.



Zealots- Exactly, all but wiped out, some weren't, some continued to follow Christ, some decided that he wasn't the true Messiah.

Gnosticts- Exactly, followers of Christ that roamed the middle east.



Exactly, the Gospel of JC is way bigger than just the New Testament. A big point.



Exactly, Islam, Moe's religion, forced the Islamic golden age onto the Middle East and destroyed world trade in about 800 AD.



Exactly again, Moe wanted to "united" the Middle East because of the "false" Religion the Romans brought about JC(Byzantine). After he died his religion grew and the "Islamic golden age" was upon the Middle East.



Except I know that it's in the Bible somewhere that some Roman soldiers were followers of Christ. That's the thing, his teachings were all throughout Rome, and that is why Constantine had to bring it to the forefornt.

Yes we have found caves in Israel that prove "somone" around 30 AD was already working on uniting Rome and Israel through religion.

As the religions of the world stand there can be no assimilation without dispensing with basic truths. The best that can be done is to accept each has a right to believe in his own way.

Exactly and the easiest way that will be accomplished is if all just accept God and get on with it, without a religious zeal about it.

Thanks for sticking around Trevor!

Where do I start?

No man creates a religion. It comes from others accepting and following his teachings.

You cannot connect the 3 religions except by the tenuous thread of retrospection by Islam.
Judaism and Christianity are connected Jesus, the Jew.

Abraham is said, debateably, to be the connection through Isaac and Ishmael. We have the family tree of the Jews in the OT. We have no such for the Arabs. Only a claim, again in retrospection, from the Arabs.

Zealots were almost wiped out at the fall of Jerusalem. Those that fled to Egypt and Alexandria fell to the same fate as the others. Most preferred death to living under the Romans. By the 6th Century, the Jews mostly having been dispersed no longer needed 'Zealotism'.

Gnostics.

Just three examples of different gnostic thought.
Some say Jesus was the embodiment of the supreme being in human form. Note - not the Son of God.
Others claim he was a human who though gaining knowledge (gnosis) became divine and taught his disciples likewise.
Third section believe Jesus was a false messiah.

This sets them aside from Christianity, Judaism and Islam, for reasons which you will know.

There are references to Roman soldiers being converted but this was not commonplace. Very few Christians were in the Roman army, perhaps due to its emphasis on pagan ritual

Constantine did make Christianity the Roman religion, but I think his reasons were not quite what you think. Still we'll agree on that.

Islamic golden age. Started by the Abbasid? Caliphate around 750AD. The pursuit of Knowledge, rather than Mohammeds use of force.

You say 'if we all accept god and get on with it'. Which God?

Greetings to you and your family.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

No man creates a religion. It comes from others accepting and following his teachings.

I'm sorry this doesn't make sense.

You cannot connect the 3 religions except by the tenuous thread of retrospection by Islam.
Judaism and Christianity are connected Jesus, the Jew.

Abraham is said, debateably, to be the connection through Isaac and Ishmael. We have the family tree of the Jews in the OT. We have no such for the Arabs. Only a claim, again in retrospection, from the Arabs.

Deny whatever you want at this point.

Zealots were almost wiped out at the fall of Jerusalem. Those that fled to Egypt and Alexandria fell to the same fate as the others. Most preferred death to living under the Romans. By the 6th Century, the Jews mostly having been dispersed no longer needed 'Zealotism'.

Gnostics.

Just three examples of different gnostic thought.
Some say Jesus was the embodiment of the supreme being in human form. Note - not the Son of God.
Others claim he was a human who though gaining knowledge (gnosis) became divine and taught his disciples likewise.
Third section believe Jesus was a false messiah.

This sets them aside from Christianity, Judaism and Islam, for reasons which you will know.

This doesn't disprove that it all fell under the cloak of Islam, just more proof in what I am saying. May follower of Christ, some of Just Abraham, then Moe came along.....

There are references to Roman soldiers being converted but this was not commonplace. Very few Christians were in the Roman army, perhaps due to its emphasis on pagan ritual

Constantine did make Christianity the Roman religion, but I think his reasons were not quite what you think. Still we'll agree on that.

Exactly, Christ infiltrated the Roman army, and archaeology proves this along with the Bible.

Islamic golden age. Started by the Abbasid? Caliphate around 750AD. The pursuit of Knowledge, rather than Mohammeds use of force.

You say 'if we all accept god and get on with it'. Which God?

There was lots of force, this is why trade was cut off through the Middle east. Lots of knowledge yes, I agree with that though.

That would be the ONE God. Creator of all things.

Blessings to you and yours.

[trevorw2539]

Sept 28, 2012 23:04:17 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

No man creates a religion. It comes from others accepting and following his teachings.

I'm sorry this doesn't make sense.

I phrased this badly. No individual, whether it be Christ or
Buddha or Mohammed, creates a 'religion'. The 'religion' only comes if their teachings are taken up by others. If no-one had listened to Christ or Mohammed, and their teachings, and taken them up, they would have faded into history. In that sense religion is man made, though the source may be considered 'divine'.


My quote.
You cannot connect the 3 religions except by the tenuous thread of retrospection by Islam.
Judaism and Christianity are connected Jesus, the Jew.

Abraham is said, debateably, to be the connection through Isaac and Ishmael. We have the family tree of the Jews in the OT. We have no such for the Arabs. Only a claim, again in retrospection, from the Arabs.



Your quote.
Deny whatever you want at this point.

I have to deny it. There is no link between between Christianity and Islam - EXCEPT IN RETROSPECTION BY ISLAM. Where in the Bible do we have reference to Islam, 600 years in the future. Yes, I've read Islams claims - again retrospective. Again everything that Islam claims has to retrospective. It is 600 years later than Christianity and 2000 years later than Judaism.

You can only accept Mohammeds teaching by faith. Mohammed gives no 'proof' that his retrospective teachings are true.
Christianity and Judaism are linked by Jesus the Jew, and other points.. However it is interesting that Christianity has a degree of retrospection about it, claiming some OT prophecies for itself. However that positive link remains.

But not so with Islam, for all their claims.

My quote
Zealots were almost wiped out at the fall of Jerusalem. Those that fled to Egypt and Alexandria fell to the same fate as the others. Most preferred death to living under the Romans. By the 6th Century, the Jews mostly having been dispersed no longer needed 'Zealotism'.

Gnostics.

Just three examples of different gnostic thought.
Some say Jesus was the embodiment of the supreme being in human form. Note - not the Son of God.
Others claim he was a human who though gaining knowledge (gnosis) became divine and taught his disciples likewise.
Third section believe Jesus was a false messiah.

This sets them aside from Christianity, Judaism and Islam, for reasons which you will know

Your quote.
This doesn't disprove that it all fell under the cloak of Islam, just more proof in what I am saying. May follower of Christ, some of Just Abraham, then Moe came along.....

My quote
Surely the fact that Christianity, Judaism, and Gnosticism exist today as separate from Islam proves that they did not 'fall under the cloak of Islam'.

You claimed earlier that Islam fought the Romans partly over their religious idol worship. Rome had, over the years, assimilated many other gods from Greece etc into their religion. Now you are claiming the same for Islam. Assimilating Judaism, Christianity and Gnosticism, all which were alien to Mohammeds teaching, and which the Qu'ran contradicts. We went through this earlier.

My quote.
Islamic golden age. Started by the Abbasid? Caliphate around 750AD. The pursuit of Knowledge, rather than Mohammeds use of force.

You say 'if we all accept god and get on with it'. Which God?



Your quote.
There was lots of force, this is why trade was cut off through the Middle east. Lots of knowledge yes, I agree with that though.

That would be the ONE God. Creator of all things.


My quote.
I think that the Islamic conquered territories of the time were fairly well established by 750AD, allowing the 'Golden Age' to begin. There were further conquests, but 4 centuries later.


One 'God' - yes. Creator - yes.

Best wishes.

[Deleted]

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Hey ! Good to see your smiling face!!!

Hey Trevor,

I'm going to try and condense this a bit right now. I see what you mean now about how there has to be people to zealous/religious believe in someone for there to be a religion.

What I meant was at the time of the "golden age" they were all forced under the cloak of Islam. The zealots do still exists to a point in Israel; remember, still 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.

The reason I say it doesn't matter at this point, really what anyone believes, is because the entire world is engulfed in what is going down in the middle east. JC infiltrated the Roman army to set up the zealot/Gnostic followers of Christ(something I have been saying forever, look at the exodus thread).

JC also said as much apparently...

Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war.
For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."

And the fact is regardless of what anyone thinks. This is what the Islamics believe.

According to Islamic tradition which describes this graphically, Jesus' descent will be in the midst of wars fought by the Mahdi (lit. "the rightly guided one"), known in Islamic eschatology as the redeemer of Islam, against the Antichrist (al-Masīh ad-Dajjāl, "False messiah") and his followers.[26] Jesus will descend at the point of a white arcade, east of Damascus, dressed in yellow robes – his head anointed. He will then join the Mahdi in his war against the Antichrist. Jesus, considered as a Muslim, will abide by the Islamic teachings. Eventually, Jesus will slay the Antichrist, and then everyone from the People of the Book (ahl al-kitāb, referring to Jews and Christians) will believe in him. Thus, there will be one community, that of Islam.[27]

You can read; Quran sura 43 (az-Zukhruf), ayah 57-67 for the exact scripture if you want.

And this is what it says in the Torah about the messianic age...

Jewish eschatology holds that the coming of the Messiah will be associated with a specific series of events that have not yet occurred, including the return of Jews to their homeland and the rebuilding of The Temple, a Messianic Age of peace[5] and understanding during which "the knowledge of God" fills the earth,[6] and since none of these events occurred during the lifetime of Jesus (nor have they occurred afterwards), he is not a candidate for messiah.

The Jewish people think that Christ isn't the Messiah because none of the Messianic prophecies happened/have happened since Christ was here. I say that Israel exits today because of Christ, and the Torah doesn't actually state how long between the messiah's life and the messianic age there will be.

Blessings.

[trevorw2539]

Sept 30, 2012 14:30:17 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Hey ! Good to see your smiling face!!!

Hey Trevor,

I'm going to try and condense this a bit right now. I see what you mean now about how there has to be people to zealous/religious believe in someone for there to be a religion.

What I meant was at the time of the "golden age" they were all forced under the cloak of Islam. The zealots do still exists to a point in Israel; remember, still 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.

The reason I say it doesn't matter at this point, really what anyone believes, is because the entire world is engulfed in what is going down in the middle east. JC infiltrated the Roman army to set up the zealot/Gnostic followers of Christ(something I have been saying forever, look at the exodus thread).

JC also said as much apparently...

Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war.
For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."

And the fact is regardless of what anyone thinks. This is what the Islamics believe.


You can read; Quran sura 43 (az-Zukhruf), ayah 57-67 for the exact scripture if you want.

And this is what it says in the Torah about the messianic age...

Jewish eschatology holds that the coming of the Messiah will be associated with a specific series of events that have not yet occurred, including the return of Jews to their homeland and the rebuilding of The Temple, a Messianic Age of peace[5] and understanding during which "the knowledge of God" fills the earth,[6] and since none of these events occurred during the lifetime of Jesus (nor have they occurred afterwards), he is not a candidate for messiah.

The Jewish people think that Christ isn't the Messiah because none of the Messianic prophecies happened/have happened since Christ was here. I say that Israel exits today because of Christ, and the Torah doesn't actually state how long between the messiah's life and the messianic age there will be.

Blessings.

Masada Shall Not Fall Again. Many British Units have similar mottos. That doesn't make them Zealots.

Why should JC infiltrate the RomanArmy to set up the Zealots. The Romans Army would certainly not accept Jewish fanatics. Christians perhaps, Jewish fanatics absolutely not. And the Gnostics were anti-Christ anyway (See their beliefs). Why should JC help them.

The reference in the Qu'ran refers only to Jesus. Nothing about Armageddon, at least not in mine.

The Torah does not mention 'the Messiah' at all.
The Oral Torah (OT) has reference to it. Much of it is in Jewish traditionalism that maintains, in Islamic fashion, (retrospection)that it has always been part of Judaism.

With regard to Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah and the OT, I agree.

However many modern Jews believe that there will never be another Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. That the time of Sacrifices etc is past. Though they still believe in the return of the Messiah.

I have absolutely no doubt that I/someone could take the Qu'ran and the Bible, adapt both and write another set of credible Scriptures, though at my age I probably wouldn't get it finished.

Go through the various Hadiths. Look at the difference between Liberal, Progressive and Orthodox Islam. See how many have Islamists have been killed for trying to interpret Islam in their own thoughts. All religions/scriptures are open to interpretation, though fanatics oppose such interpretations.

Greetings.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Masada Shall Not Fall Again. Many British Units have similar mottos. That doesn't make them Zealots.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zealotry

After the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple in AD 70, 960 Zealots under the lead of Elazar ben Yair took refuge by capturing the Roman fortress of Masada and taking no prisoners.

Rome sent the 10th Legion to retake the stronghold, but it failed for three years. It is estimated that they took over 1,000 casualties in the process. The Zealots held the fortress even after the Romans invented new types of siege engines.

Finally, in the third year of the siege, 73, The Romans completed a massive earthwork siege ramp up one face of the mountain on which Masada sat. This allowed them to bring the full strength of their siege to bear and penetrate the walls, a feat impossible before due to the topography of the mountain itself. When the Romans stormed in to capture the Zealots, they found that the fighters and their families had all committed suicide.

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.

Why should JC infiltrate the RomanArmy to set up the Zealots. The Romans Army would certainly not accept Jewish fanatics. Christians perhaps, Jewish fanatics absolutely not. And the Gnostics were anti-Christ anyway (See their beliefs). Why should JC help them.

The reference in the Qu'ran refers only to Jesus. Nothing about Armageddon, at least not in mine.

The Torah does not mention 'the Messiah' at all.
The Oral Torah (OT) has reference to it. Much of it is in Jewish traditionalism that maintains, in Islamic fashion, (retrospection)that it has always been part of Judaism.

JC was helping us all, using what he wished, because he is the one true profit of God. That is my point, war on war=Peace(messianic age)

I agree the Torah only talks about the "Latter Days" and the one that will bring it. Jeremiah 23,5, Isaiah 11,2-5, Jeremiah 33,15

However many modern Jews believe that there will never be another Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. That the time of Sacrifices etc is past. Though they still believe in the return of the Messiah.

I have absolutely no doubt that I/someone could take the Qu'ran and the Bible, adapt both and write another set of credible Scriptures, though at my age I probably wouldn't get it finished.

Go through the various Hadiths. Look at the difference between Liberal, Progressive and Orthodox Islam. See how many have Islamists have been killed for trying to interpret Islam in their own thoughts. All religions/scriptures are open to interpretation, though fanatics oppose such interpretations.

Greetings.

I guess we will see about the Temple in Jerusalem. There is a push right now to move the capital of Israel there from Tel Aviv.

I agree that Islam is the religion of the sword, not understanding. It's going to be interesting to see how the Muslim Holy wars play out.

Blessings and good Sabbath to you.

[trevorw2539]

The Torah makes no mention of the Messiah or Latter days. It is the first five books of the OT. The complete OT is known as the 'Oral' Torah.

Your Wiki reference to the Zealots was interesting. Did you notice it was in the past tense?

Enjoy your Sabbath.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Mashiach: The Messiah
www.mechon-mamre.org/jewfaq/mashiach.htm

However, the Torah contains several references to "the Latter Days" (acharit ha-yamim), which is considered the time of the mashiach; thus, the concept of mashiach was known in the most ancient times.

The term "mashiach" literally means the anointed one, and refers to the ancient practice of anointing kings with oil when they took the throne. The mashiach is the one who will be anointed as king in the Latter Days.

He will be the very real king of a very real Torah government in the Land of Israel: not some "spiritual" or "symbolic" king in Israel, as some have mistakenly thought (especially Christians), and certainly not some gifted Jewish spiritual leader outside the Land of Israel, as others have mistakenly thought (including thousands of Jews in our generation as well as the followers of earlier false Jewish "mashiachs" in generations past). It should be mentioned that while it is not forbidden to foolishly believe that one is the mashiach despite that he is not, it is certainly not the sign of a good grasp of the Torah to be mislead as to his nature and role, described more fully below.

The word "mashiach" does not mean "savior". The notion of an innocent, semi-divine (let alone fully divine) human being who will sacrifice himself to save us from the consequences of our own sins is a purely Christian concept that has no basis in normal Jewish thought, though it seems to have been invented or adopted by Jewish apostates in the early Church. Unfortunately, this Christian concept has become so deeply ingrained in the English word "messiah" that this English word should probably no longer be used to refer to the Jewish concept. Thus, we prefer to use the less familiar word "mashiach" throughout this page.

www.karaite-korner.org/end_of_days.shtml

The term "End of Days" (Hebrew "Aharit HaYamim"), which has also been variously translated as "The Latter Days" and "The Last Days", has the meaning in Hebrew of "a long time from now" and there is no implication that the world will come to an end. On the contrary we read in Isa 66,22 that the heaven and earth will be renewed and that despite great change the covenant with Israel will continue in this future epoch:

"For as the renewed heavens and the renewed earth, which I create, stand before me, says YHWH, so will your seed and your name stand before me."

Indeed, after the initial upheavals, the End of Days will be a period of peace and universal obedience to YHWH as we read in Isa 2,2-3:

"And it will be in the end of days, the mountain of the House of YHWH will be established at the head of the mountains, and higher than the hills, and all the nations shall stream unto it. And many peoples shall go and say 'Let us go and ascend to the mountain of YHWH, to the House of the God of Jacob that he teach us from his ways and that we may go in his paths, for the Torah goes forth out of Zion and the word of YHWH from Jerusalem.' And he will judge between many nations and rebuke many peoples. And they will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. And nation shall not lift up sword against nation and they shall no longer learn war."

The theme of all mankind worshipping YHWH is repeated in Jeremiah 31,30.33

Finally, in the third year of the siege, 73, The Romans completed a massive earthwork siege ramp up one face of the mountain on which Masada sat.

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.

One God, that's the point the JC was making. Religious Zeal is rewarded like in the book of Job, because it's Gods Job to judge. Blessings

[fretslider]

"One God, that's the point the JC was making. Religious Zeal is rewarded like in the book of Job, because it's Gods Job to judge. Blessings "


Yeshua Ha'Notsri was a very remarkable man for his time. He certainly annoyed Caiaphus and ended up on the wrong side of the Sanhedrin. His radical thinking and ideas were perceived as a major threat to the status quo.


But I mean, come on, the son of God? That was 2000 years ago, when people thought any occurrence was a manifestation of 'God's disposition.' If people want to place their faith in something that doesn't exist that's fine by me, but I just don't buy it.


I 'm with a non-prophet organisation.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Hey fretslider, welcome.

Regardless of if he was born from a Virgin or not, you see the basis of his accomplishments. In fact he was called Rabbi, which means that he was accepted a bit more than is let on. He had many people from different sects of Judaism as apostles, this also shines on that point.

Overall what my point is, history will eventually show that JC is the messiah that the Torah talks about; he made it that way because God willed it. He is the OP(only profit).

The Jewish people maintain to this day that JC wasn't born from a Virgin; the fact is that point is moot when it comes right down to it. It’s not about good over evil; it’s about balance in the chemical equation that is life on earth.

[trevorw2539]

Quote.
However, the Torah contains several references to "the Latter Days" (acharit ha-yamim), which is considered the time of the mashiach; thus, the concept of mashiach was known in the most ancient times.

Irrelevant. 'The Latter days' could mean anything from the first exiles to the dispersion by the Romans. . The interpretation of the term in the Pentateuch is from later times. Retrospection. Again I say there is no reference to the Messiah in the Torah. You are talking Jewish tradition.
Messiah and 'latter days' are undoubtedly brought to the fore in the apocalyptic books. (Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah etc) later.

Much that we take as fact and true is not necessarily so. It is Jewish tradition that Moses wrote the Torah (Pentateuch - 1st 5 books) but the origin of this 'fact' does not come till around the 1st Century. Then Miamonidies makes it part of his 13 principles in the 12th Cent. CE


Some of the stories/myths in the Pentateuch are handed down from earlier civilisations.

Study of the Bible alone presents us with a one-sided 'story'. Without background and outside knowledge it can give a false impression.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

I don't study the bible alone, not in the least. That is why for the longest time I have been talking about the crossing of this all and you have been denying it. At least you are past that point. You are free to believe what you would like Trevor. The key word there is FREE. That's how I know this all originated as a slave religion.

I always look to present day events to shape my view of times past.

Philippines, Militants Agree to End Decades-Long Conflict
www.theepochtimes.com/n2/world/philippines-militants-agree-to-end-decades-long-conflict-301014.html

The Philippines Sunday came to a tentative peace agreement with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, a militant group that has battled the Filipino army for nearly 40 years.
The conflict between the government and the Moro has killed more than 100,000 people, including soldiers and civilians, since it began in Mindanao, the second largest island in the country.

In the past this might not have been as significant, however, when you look at what else is going on...

Kenyan military says it has driven al-Shabab militia from its last stronghold in Somalia
www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/kenyan-military-drives-al-qaedas-shabab-militia-out-of-somali-port/2012/09/28/e06b2646-095f-11e2-858a-5311df86ab04_story.html

Convoy of Pakistani, U.S. anti-war protesters blocked en route to tribal region
www.ctvnews.ca/world/convoy-of-pakistani-u-s-anti-war-protesters-blocked-en-route-to-tribal-region-1.986734

[trevorw2539]

Your quote.
I always look to present day events to shape my view of times past.

My reply.
The past has shaped the present, the present shapes the future.

All the quotes etc you have posted of news is if little relevance in a short space of time. If the situation still holds in 10-20 years it will then perhaps have some relevance.

The League of nations was set up to stop wars between nations. 'Peace' lasted less than 20 years.

You are shaping your view of the past on present events. The way of 'Second Coming' theorists who claim current events are proof of 'vague' prophecies coming true.

However, as you say I am free to believe as I will, and so are you. Good Luck.