89 chapter project: Matthew

[Pavlos Maros]

Disagreeing with the idea that He was a sociopath.

I was thinking more on the lines of psychopath, but I thought that far to strong. These type of people are the most successful people in society because they’re often ruthless, callous and superficially charming, whilst having little regard for the feelings of others. They have a tendency to perform premeditated crimes with calculated risk. Or they may manipulate someone else into breaking the law, while keeping themselves safely at a distance. They lack guilt and cant take responsibility for their own actions, They disregard the law and they have a deceitful and manipulative nature.
The character of jesus kind of fits with that description, I think he fits somewhere in between psychopath and sociopath. However not how the writers intended I expect.

 

[Luce NDs]

If Caesar was god at the time and Jesus was a child of god ... does that raise curiosities about what is really behind the myths of nominality? Is nothing normal or just essence of something that isn't? ("appearing as isn't" once defined by Webster as "incarnate vision")

Is that allusion to false perspectives ... chaos on the Moors throwing in armour ... and amore as love of conflict and aversion to co operation of survival? It just isn't here now ... off to Elysium ...

 

[paradox3]

Reflection: Matthew 12: 1 - 50

The gospel writer continues to portray Jesus as a faithful Jew. Jesus quotes the scriptures and seeks reform of the legalism displayed by the Pharisees. The theme of prophecy fulfilled is woven throughout.

Either Jesus has awareness dawning about what lies ahead or the writer is foreshadowing future events.

The verses about the unclean spirit returning to its house were new to me and they made me chuckle. Going with metaphor, it certainly is difficult to banish some of those "demons" we have in our hearts and souls. Funny how they wait until the house is clean, swept and empty to return!

 

[Luce NDs]

Is pride of enlightenment often overdone ... considering all we don;t know that is out there and could befall us as belittle'n?

That's neigh Mrs ... the background broad ... some will build walls to isolate themselves from civilized Charon ... moo nin?

Thus Titches in the night ... soft bumps, and heaps ... mounds? Collective 'đ' issues if gathered ....

The militants stand down on their points ... something to live bi?

 

[Jaebius]

Reflection: Matthew 12: 1 - 50

The gospel writer continues to portray Jesus as a faithful Jew. Jesus quotes the scriptures and seeks reform of the legalism displayed by the Pharisees. The theme of prophecy fulfilled is woven throughout.

Either Jesus has awareness dawning about what lies ahead or the writer is foreshadowing future events.

The verses about the unclean spirit returning to its house were new to me and they made me chuckle. Going with metaphor, it certainly is difficult to banish some of those "demons" we have in our hearts and souls. Funny how they wait until the house is clean, swept and empty to return!

Christ, I believe, came to destroy Satan's works. He wanted to take Satan's house and save Satan's prey from it. This Jesus accomplished through his entire time on Earth, by his obedience in behalf of all. He gained a full deliverence for everyone from Satan's bondage. On Jesus' side alone is victory.

 

[Luce NDs]

Burned out belief in non cognizance ... thus naivete seen ...

 

[paradox3]

Christ, I believe, came to destroy Satan's works. He wanted to take Satan's house and save Satan's prey from it. This Jesus accomplished through his entire time on Earth, by his obedience in behalf of all. He gained a full deliverence for everyone from Satan's bondage. On Jesus' side alone is victory.

Do you get this specifically from Matthew 12? Or is it more of a general idea of the gospels?

 

[Jaebius]

Do you get this specifically from Matthew 12? Or is it more of a general idea of the gospels?

Matthew 12, though I can see how it could apply to what I believe the general idea of the gospels to be.

 

[Luce NDs]

General lie of the physical gospels is built on militant Zae ... totally gone as all does in dew time ...

Then there is the humble gentile side under the tablets ... sometimes gauls the authorities ... groaks?

 

[Waterfall]

Summary: Matthew 12: 1 - 50

A long chapter coming up which will be a challenge to summarize. Jesus is confronted several times by the Pharisees and he calls them a brood of vipers. Anyone remember the poster GRR or Golden Rule? He always challenged my view of Jesus as being too sanitized and he liked to remind me about the brood of vipers and the whitewashed tombs.

1. Jesus is challenged by the Pharisees about picking grain on the sabbath. He quotes the Hebrew scriptures, "I desire mercy and not sacrifice" (NRSV) and declares himself lord of the sabbath.

2. Again making the Pharisees unhappy, Jesus cures a man with a withered hand on the sabbath.

3. After curing the crowds, Jesus orders them not to make him known. This fulfills a prophecy from Isaiah.

4. Speaking against the Son of Man will be forgiven. Speaking against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven now or in the age to come.

5. A tree is known for its fruit, either good or bad. On the day of judgement we will be called to account for all our words.

6. The scribes and Pharisees ask Jesus for a sign. He predicts that for 3 days and 3 nights the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth.

7. When an unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it wanders for a while and then returns to its house. On finding the house clean, swept and empty it brings along seven other spirits more evil than itself.

8. While speaking to the crowds, the mother and brothers of Jesus want to speak with him. He declares his disciples to be his mother and brothers. 12 :50 "For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." (NRSV)

Wasnt the Apostle Paul a Pharisee.? And more interesting that the Saducees didnt believe in the resurrection but the Pharisees did. Which group did Jesus belong to I wonder?

 

[Mendalla]

Which group did Jesus belong to I wonder?

Answer could be neither. They were hardly the only factions in Judaism back then (e.g. Essenes).

 

[Waterfall]

Answer could be neither. They were hardly the only factions in Judaism back then (e.g. Essenes).

Which would be interesting to discuss.

 

[Waterfall]

Hence why you failed.

You only think so because it doesnt fit into your conclusions.

 

[Jaebius]

We who follow Christ must bear the yoke of Christ, the yoke of the cross. We are, after all, followers of he who bore his cross for us.

 

[Luce NDs]

Tis like an aboriginal Tolken ... a sign of a different meaning to those intending to overwhelm ... an avatar? Something buried there is Precious!

Avarice ... ... whee green folks to stun with fruitcake stories and how figgy duff is bad for yah ... something falling from the other side of the mound? Sisyphus?

Respect thy fodder and mudder and something of spoor will spin out ... demos builds as construct ...

 

[Pavlos Maros]

You only think so because it doesnt fit into your conclusions.

No evidence isn't something I think. It is a fact. There is no contemporaneous evidence for a jesus person. Not my conclusion a fact.

 

[Pontifex Geronimo 13]

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources

 

[blackbelt1961]

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources

and guaranteed they dont care to read study , learn, because as waterfall said :

it doesnt fit into there conclusions

 

[paradox3]

Wasnt the Apostle Paul a Pharisee.? And more interesting that the Saducees didnt believe in the resurrection but the Pharisees did. Which group did Jesus belong to I wonder?

Traditionally Paul was a Pharisee, I believe. There is a theory that Jesus was closest to the Pharisees in his theology, etc, but of course he distanced himself from them. I, too, would be interested in learning more about this.

 

[Pavlos Maros]

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources

Same stuff trotted out yet again Chansen is right about you guys. Wow!
The first one in your link. 2nd century Tacitus: This speaks against it being based on any Roman records. It is merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time. mostly from Pliny. The passage is not evidence for a biblical Jesus or a jesus person. it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about a messiah/christ. He never mentions jesus by name. Romans would have called him by name jesus son of joseph. if they had records of him. And Romans kept meticulous records. and nobody will read this again for a millennium. not even early christians.

And the second one 2nd century Pliny the younger: Tacitus got is info mainly from Pliny so same reason. Pliny only mentions a messiah/christ.

And now 1st century Josephus. This passage is an extrapolation. In the Testamonium Flavianum it's written christ the messiah not jesus. All the so called evidence for jesus hasn't mentioned him yet. and Josephus is considered the best one.

Lets go to the next one. The Talmud Spanning a huge 1st century to 5th century, it mentions a Yeshua(Jehoshua), who was hung for forty days before his execution. it also states he was born a hundred years pre-christ and that he had five disciples Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah who were executed along side him. It doesn't mention your jesus. Yet again funny that.

And now we have Lucian who does not even mention jesus or a christ this time. Fantastic evidence for a jesus so far.

Who's next. Nobody he gave up, and so should you. There is no contemporaneous evidence for a jesus person and most certainly not for a biblical magicman jesus.