1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

They outlawed carrying the flag of their own country? Say goodbye to country.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

For New Testament, I generally use NRSV with NOAB. The Entirety of Galatians 3 and other letters from Paul are teaching the exact opposite of Jesus' quote in Matthew. I don't know how one reads Paul and does not see he is a contradiction of Jesus. Acts clearly shows Paul who never met Jesus (but claims to have seen him in dreams) has a very different viewpoint from the apostles that did meet Jesus and were close to him.

This shouldn't come as a surprise to you. Thomas Jefferson wrote: "Of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus."

See this for a bit of a discussion on the topic: https://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/paul-vs-jesus-and-james/

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

Jesus taught that one should follow the law. His brother James taught the same after Jesus' death.

Paul who never met Jesus then claims Jesus kept appearing to him in dreams teaching the opposite than what Jesus' family and the other apostles heard directly from him while he was alive. Paul's writings all over is filled with speaking against the law, and instead looking to replace it with faith. Book of Acts shows how their was a divide between Paul and the real apostles.

It would seem to me that Paul continued to persecute the follows of Jesus, but his new strategy was to subvert his religion altogether. Reading Paul's writings without the assumption that he is the continuation of Jesus, one starts to notice glaring differences between Paul and what Jesus taught and what his followers and family practiced.

2
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 2 points ago +2 / -0

Jesus is quoted as saying in Matthew 5:19: "Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

However, Paul teaches the opposite in Galatians 3. Would it not seem that Paul is a charlatan who proclaimed he acted in the name of Jesus, but in fact did the exact opposite? Would not Jesus consider Paul to be the least in the kingdom of heaven?

2
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is better than nothing, but the actual contents leave room for improvement.

The amount of Vitamin C in this is extremely low. The amount of Vitamin D is similar to what you find in a lot of these kinds of things, but should ideally be higher still. It's missing Quercetin.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

Isaiah 53:3

What indication do you have that Isaiah here is talking about any Messiah? If you would read the chapters leading up to it, it would be clear that it isn't.

However, just notice the verse prior:

Isaiah 53:2: "He rose like a sapling, like a root out of parched earth, he had no form, no beauty, his appearance was no appearance to enjoy"

Do you believe that Jesus was an ugly individual that no one wanted to look at? That's surely not how he's depicted in all the artwork of him. If Christians honestly thought Isaiah 53 referred to Jesus, all artwork of him would show a hideous creature.

Isaiah 53:10: "God wanted to crush him, with sickness, so that he would place restitution for his soul, so his offspring could extend his day, the will of God would succeed in his hand."

Was Jesus a sickly individual? Did he have offspring?

It seems your only purpose to try to tear down my faith and discredit every single thing I say.

I'm only trying to tear down your mistaken trust in Matthew. You cannot honestly told me you learned Isaiah in full, and the works of the other prophets. If you did, you would chuck Matthew out the window for making a mockery of them.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

That was quick. Were you just waiting around for my answer?

No, I actually just happened to long in a minute or two after you responded, and saw I had a new reply waiting.

Second quote: I know this text and what it speaks of. Matthew, who knew Jesus, referred to this text as being (also) a reference to the Messiah, and I think you should trust him, even if it seems like he is plucking out a portion to prove his point. It also supports my point about how spiritual Jews in his time handled prophecy differently from our modern linear intellectual approach.

You really studied Micah?

Also, Christian scholars today agree that the book of Matthew was not necessarily written by anyone named Matthew, and was probably written a good 50 years after the events depicted: https://evidenceforchristianity.org/did-the-apostle-matthew-write-the-gospel-of-matthew-and-when-can-we-assert-he-wrote-it/

Seeing that most of the so-called fulfillment prophecies quote phantom verses, or seem to butcher earlier texts, why should I trust this book? If you studied the earlier prophets, this would become quite apparent. The other Gospels do not make all these claims. Being that Matthew is the oddity here, why should I take this as reference for anything that was understood at the time?

Third quote: I have given you enough citations. Your unkind prideful insulting tone tells me you are not looking to engage in a civil discussion of ideas but looking for things to shoot me down, and I will not give you any more ammunition. If it bothers you that much, go study the Bible for yourself.

You last sentence is actually the point I'm making. I have studied the Bible for myself. I cannot find any "prophecies saying the Messiah would be despised" in the Old Testament. I can only imagine people who never studied the Old Testament would believe this. My fervent wish is that more people would study the whole Bible.

Fourth quote: I would counsel you not to try to handle spiritual things like prophecy with only your intellect. It is an insufficient tool.

According to this logic, the Prophets should have kept their mouths shut because no one could understand them. On the contrary, my belief is that the Prophets spoke to the common man in their day, and the common man understood what they had to say. Otherwise, why would Jeremiah orate everyday in the marketplace?

But I will say this: when the magi came before Herod to find the birthplace of the Messiah, the Jewish scribes searching the matter told him unequivocally that it was Bethlehem, and Micah 5:2 was the scripture that would have led them to say that.

You're trying to defend the book of Matthew by quoting other evidence invented by the book of Matthew. The other Gospels do not have the magi asking Herod to find the birthplace of the Messiah. The story is also somewhat nonsensical, because if the magi are following the star (whatever that means), why bother asking Herod anything? Just keep following the star. As I said earlier though, Micah 5 could indicate that the Messiah should also be born in Bethlehem, but it does not necessarily mean that, as it could mean his royal lineage began in Bethlehem.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

The Jews of antiquity didn't look at prophecy quite the way we do. They saw the meaning in it differently.

That's a whimsical argument. If they would have viewed it like you claim, they would have all mass converted to Christianity, but they didn't. The other gospels don't make these claims either.

They saw the meaning in it differently. Egypt - Hosea 11:1, referenced in Matthew 2:15 as speaking of Jesus.

Actual text: Hosea 11:1-3: "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and from Egypt I called to my son. They were called, yet they went from their face; they sacrificed unto the Baalim, and offered to graven images. And I taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by their arms; but they didn't know that I healed them..."

Pray tell how do you understand this to be talking about a Messiah? This is chastising the people of Israel for worshiping other things, after God took them out of Egypt and raised them up.

Nazareth - referenced in Matthew 2:23, is not from any particular prophecy but may be by inference from various prophecies saying the Messiah would be despised.

Citation needed.

Bethlehem - Micah 5:2, referenced in Matthew 2:6, a solid prediction about where Messiah would be born.

Solid isn't the word I'd use.

"And you Bethlehem of Ephratha, small among the thousands of Judah, from you there will be my ruler of Israel, his lineage from earlier days."

You can understand this as either the Messiah is from Bethlehem, or that the Messiah is from David who was from Bethlehem. It's certainly not "solid" that the Messiah must be from Bethlehem, as being descendant from David would fit the requirement.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hosea 11:1-3: "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and from Egypt I called to my son. They were called, yet they went from their face; they sacrificed unto the Baalim, and offered to graven images. And I taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by their arms; but they didn't know that I healed them..."

Nothing here is talking about a Messiah. This is chastising the people of Israel for worshiping other things, after God took them out of Egypt and raised them up.

Isaiah 11:1: "And there shall come forth a shoot out of the stock of Jesse, and a twig shall grow forth out of his roots."

Nothing here is talking about a city. What is seen here is multiple tree-related metaphors. No one would be looking at all these tree metaphors and saying to themselves, "oh, how can the Messiah come from each of these places?"

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think you missed the point. The thread author said there are 3 prophesies about the Messiah, one saying he we be born in Egypt, one in Nazareth, and one in Bethlehem, and for a long time, no one understood who this was, it only made sense afterwards. If that's the case, please point out three such sources that were written prior to the birth of Jesus.

Matthew was written afterwards, and therefore cannot be a source of confusion regarding three places the Messiah should be born. Please point out three texts prior to Jesus that indicate these three places.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

The prophets said the Messiah would come from Egypt, from Nazareth, and from Bethlehem, and only after His advent did people understand how those three things fit together without creating a paradox.

Citations required.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

CNN just launched some internet service to stream that way worldwide. They probably will have increased viewership outside the US due to it.

6
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 6 points ago +6 / -0

Video here from today where he's discussing the situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DojvefRlkwo

He is repeating much of the propaganda. His idea seems to be to ease things a bit for now. If they tell him tomorrow that there's a new killer wave, he'll jump in with both feet to force everyone to do whatever they want.

He needs to be dealt with just like the others.

2
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nah, he can be saved from a public hanging by other means. Such as the public deciding to do a public crucifixion instead.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm pretty sure Biden, may he drop dead, takes the other plane instead of the usual one is because the other plane has a shower, which he needs regularly.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +3 / -2

It's usually easily to tell.

The actual meaning behind the name Jew is "thankful one". Rooted in the Matriarch Leah thanking G-d for giving her Judah. A real Jew is someone who goes around thanking G-d and praising G-d.

Someone who tells you they're Jewish and Atheist is not a Jew. If you see a so-called Jew just amassing money and/or power, but never thanks G-d for their success, then they're not a real Jew.

0
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 0 points ago +1 / -1

King Solomon, the principle author of Proverbs was not a Christian. He did not believe in Jesus, nor the Trinity.

He also mentions a different salvation plan in Kings 8:35-36. Speaking about the Israelites being exiled to different places, he says: "...if they direct their prayers toward this area, and praise Your name, and return from their sins ... and You will forgive Your servants and Your nation Israel...".

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

No. King Hezekiah was responsible for its spread. See Proverbs 25:1: "These also are proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied out."

Other extra-biblical sources relate to how King Hezekiah was responsible for editing and popularizing books written by his progenitors, which includes Proverbs.

The last two chapters of Proverbs also have headers indicating that they are not from Solomon, but from other sources. The bulk of the book is of Solomon, but the book as we know it is thanks to Hezekiah and his men.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +2 / -1

Proverbs has validity thanks to King Hezekiah, and his work to promote it.

Various early Christian groups included Proverbs in their canon, in order to give their version of Christianity validity. Those group who did not include it, such as Marcionism, Gnosticism, and others, have since died out.

1
TheMoreYouKnowOkay 1 point ago +1 / -0

There's no shortage of tests, because there's no point to testing.

If you don't feel good, stay home, drink plenty of fluids, take your vitamins, and aspirin. If there's a chance you think you have the wuflu, take ivermectin, you don't need to test yourself prior to doing so.

If you feel fine, then do whatever you want.

view more: Next ›