Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, they have been using force and violence to convert ever since then. Which is proof that original meaning of the gospels has been long forgotten.
I know, right?
What a horrible time in history!
It just shows how screwy early man was....even through the 13c !
Even THEN men thought violence was 'a righteous thing'...crazy.
It goes to show how the violent nonsense, that people still blame God for today,
came from...1000s of years earlier ! Men's minds !
As far as humor, you didn't think it was funny when James and John tried to get their MOTHER to convince Jesus to be at his right and left side during his time of glory? A Jewish mother. Think about it.
Worth thinking about - but even funnier is the disciples sitting on the 12 thrones. Which one is sitting on the 12th? Without Judas, the salvation of man wouldn't have happened. Think about it.
Worth thinking about - but even funnier is the disciples sitting on the 12 thrones. Which one is sitting on the 12th? Without Judas, the salvation of man wouldn't have happened. Think about it.
Paul was the 12th. But I doubt that he even knew the story of the 12 apostles anyway.
But your original point is still profound. It's something I had never even thought of. How is it "good news" if all that happens afterwards is violence?
Christians really need to examine this story. It's a political story in many ways.
The "good news" was that faith in Jesus alone gave Paradise afterlife, not "virtue/goodness for the Elysian fields" or whatever was in trend at the time.
People weren't feeling that they nor their neighbors were "virtuous" enough, and so thought they were all destined for an eternity of "boring fairness" as ghosts in Hades ("Hidden" realm) or reincarnation, and not many would be able to enter the Elysian fields or whatever Greco-Egyptian mix they had been able to cobble together at the time given that they were trying to unite with Egypt as a province of Rome.
The "good news" was that in fact, the afterlife would be beyond blissful to all who simply believe (why so? arbitrary).
Spoiler
Good news: Jesus died and was resurrected. You no longer need to sacrifice animals, 10% tithe, go to Hades, be reincarnated, etc. you will get straight to Perfect Paradise (whether immediately with an immaterial soul, or after the judgement and resurrection of dead bodies) for Eternity simply through "truely meant" lip-service to Yahweh and his Abrahamic-like ALMOST-life-sacrifice as his Son.
Paul was the 12th. But I doubt that he even knew the story of the 12 apostles anyway.
But according to Acts, Matthias replaced Judas, and Jesus told Peter (and indeed the other disciples) that whatever they decided would be binding in Heaven and earth. So unless Judas gets throne 12 (as he should since the salvation plan wouldn't work without him doing his part) it'll have to be Matthias. No room for Paul, I'm afraid. Back to the drawing -board on that one.
This is clearly a Christian thread, so it's unclear why this in the root/general forum.
Nevertheless, if you want to be confused, you'll reach bogus conclusions. Jesus and company where not a "rebellious movement". His life and ministry was show what had been discussed and prophesied through what became the "Old Testament". It was a fulfilling of the plans laid out for centuries. That most of the Jews didn't see it is a topic unto itself, but there was no rebellion in him against them or tradition. He was an unveiling of that which had been present all along.
If anything, it was the Jews who rebelled against the "umblemished lamb" before them. They aimed to kill Jesus, and in effect part of God (since they are of the same essence). Even after he rose, they continued to fight against his legacy and who he revealed himself to be. He came to show the future; they stayed locked in the past.
The intent of the Gospels? To explain who Jesus was, show his values, and show a model and example of daily living (interacting with others; non-judging, aiming for peace, treasuring love and forgiveness, helping the poor, etc.)
Quite obviously, Jesus WAS a rebel.The gospels are littered with rebel talk and Reza Aslan has nailed Jesus perfectly in his best-seller, "Zealot". Among Jesus' most controversial sayings:
Quote:
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I have not come to bring peace, but the sword” (Matthew 10:34)
And this:
Quote:
“For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law - a man’s enemies will be members of his own household” (Matthew 10:35-36)
And this:
Quote:
“‘…if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. For it is written: “And he was numbered with the criminals,” and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me.’ The disciples said, ‘See, Lord, here are two swords.’ Jesus replied, ‘That is enough.’” Luke 22:36-38
Jesus wasn't crucified for being a rabbi. That's bunk. The Romans would only have executed a criminal intent on bringing down the Roman empire in Israel. Jesus got his just desserts. He was a militant.
At last. A debate about the claims of Christianity with reference to the Bible. A nice change from a stream of people rolling up telling atheists that we are so rude and impolite that we must be Atheist Fundamentalists.
Paul was the 12th. But I doubt that he even knew the story of the 12 apostles anyway.
Didn't Paul call himself the "late apostle" and the "13th"? Or did he call himself "the 12th" although Matthias was chosen by "the 11" to replace Judas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
Quite obviously, Jesus WAS a rebel.The gospels are littered with rebel talk and Reza Aslan has nailed Jesus perfectly in his best-seller, "Zealot". Among Jesus' most controversial sayings:
Jesus wasn't crucified for being a rabbi. That's bunk. The Romans would only have executed a criminal intent on bringing down the Roman empire in Israel. Jesus got his just desserts. He was a militant.
Definitely, The Jesus in the story wanted to LOOK like a militant and SOUGHT oppression. He name-called his fellow Jews and Jewish leaders. He ignored and back-talked Kings/secular Leaders. Most Christians want that to be their mission even if they become militant. That is probably what misled Judas if the story were true, since a True Messiah believer would be under the impression that the Messiah would win against every enemy always, not "after some time in the future, maybe".
But they also added some hippy lines for him. It's a bipolar Jesus really. Perfect for hypocrites and biased ignorants to pick and choose at their pleasure.
Paul was the 12th. But I doubt that he even knew the story of the 12 apostles anyway.
Except Paul says Jesus appeared to the twelve. It is as if he did not know the story about Judas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
