by Honeybucket 95 Replies latest watchtower bible
Did Jesus look like a Roman soldier who raped his mother? Its a more likely explanation for the mystery around his paternity than myths about virgin births.
I've heard this theory too. And we know how the ancient Hebrews treated rape victims, according to their god's law! *shiver* I'd make up a virgin birth story too! LOL
That lady in Spain apparently thought Jesus looked like this
Artists tend to portray Jesus as if he lived in their society. During the Middle Ages, Jesus is an emaciated Northern European. Rembrandt painted him as a contemporary Dutch person. HIs famous Holy Family are wearing Dutch bourgoies dress. Dali had a more surrealistic take.
His appearance may not be important. Asking what DNA he had raises a host of deep issues concerning who Jesus was. If you read the record, it was not apparent that he was God/Michael/whatever.
Joseph was devastate, Mary concocted an unbelievable
story, I slept with the Holy Spirit and he is your son father.
Joseph thought, either this woman think I,m a fool or she
is nuts. So he went out, drink a few beers or wine, came home
and passed out. Now when you are in the state of mind you can
have some weird dreams. So what happen, an angel of the Lord
appeared to him in a dream, the Holy Spirit slept with your wife.
Well that sound better then some drunken soldier. And plus he wouldn,t
worry who the child may look like. Now the one question I have,
this event (the birth of Jesus) why in A dream. Why not appear before
Joseph while he was awake. I think it would have been nice for Joseph
to be involve, don,t wait to the last minute. Was she showing when
she broke the news to Joseph, they were married, WTH.
The lady in Spain certainly lacked life drawing skills particularly portrait painting.
Art has always portrayed society throughout the ages and Jesus is no exception. I've heard theologians mention he was not an attractive dude which didn't make sense to me at the time but maybe this was so his character, works, wisdom, love, etc., would prevail over "good looks".
Jesus looked like one of those Pantera boys. It sure had the neighbors wondering.
The "lion" of Judah meets the "panther" of Rome.
Notice that "Jesus" is in parenthesis. Perhaps what Shelby is saying is that she does not know a "Jesus", as she does not believe that to be his true name. Many believe that "Jesus" real name is Yaheshua, so when Shelby says that there is/was no "Jesus", she is not saying that there was never a Christ (Yaheshua), but is simply saying that "Jesus" isn't his real name, therefore, "Jesus" doesn't exist, even though the Christ (Yaheshua) does.
You are right in this, Ohio. I think there is one thing more, however, and that is the false "jesus" that some have created. Such as the "jesus" who wants you to go to war, or to shun your loved ones, or to judge others, or the "jesus" that is going to kill and burn people in hell for eternity, etc. That "jesus" does not exist.
Its a more likely explanation for the mystery around his paternity than myths about virgin births.
Sounds more like back-room gossip to me; conjecture with no basis.
Peace,
tammy
I believe that any God who could condemn a person b/c of what some barely functioning Neaderthal did thousands of years ago is not worthy of being called God.
I would agree.
We suffer from humanity, the same way tigers suffer from being tigers.
Agreed.
Why would God create flesh that was bad. He declared creation good.
He didn't; and He did. Somehow, you've taken what I shared and mixed it in with what christianity teaches and what you think you know as a result. Why?
Because.
Because... why?
To feed the soil and the living.
Now, yes, dear Heaven (peace to you!). But your next statement doesn't quite make sense...
Without death, there would be no life.
I would disagree, dear one: without death... there is nothing BUT life. The KIND of life we have NOW depends on death... yes. That's why my Lord had to DIE: so that those who wish to can move ON from THAT kind of life. So that there could better life: the REAL life... and the temporary one we all know of now. His death, then, fed more than just the soil; it fed death itself. The living that you refer to eat from the trees of the soil which produce fruit from the soil. The living who belong to God... eat from One Tree... which produces its own fruit. Revelation 22:2
To quote Bill Mollison - "All plants are carnivores. They eat you in the end."
Very accurate... and necessary... yes... for this life. Not so much for the one held out by the Most Holy One of Israel.
i do wonder how human sin is causing stars to explode billions of years ago. somehow our sin travels backwards through time and faster than light.
Human sin has nothing to do with such stars... or their world (which exist in another time)... but only this one. Even so, I'm thinking that perhaps you, too, missed what "sin" is (on both accounts).
somehow our sin travels backwards through time and faster than light.
Our own sins only travel back to the beginning of our individual lives. Man's sin only travels back through time to the beginning of man. Before man... there was no sin... or death... in THIS world. The error... and arrogance... is in thinking that ours is the only world. Even some scientists don't agree with that.
i wonder what people think causes death.
Many different things, I'm sure.
as to "why not", everything alive tries to stay alive, in general.
Why is that? If death is just because... then all of the living should simply accept that, yes, if for no other reason than instinct. Yet, not only does everything alive try to stay alive... much of it FIGHTS to do so. Even man. Because it does not WANT to die. But death is inevitable... and that will never change, right? Do you think we will evolve... all living things... to the point that we DO simply accept death and just give in to it, even when it's premature? Or do you think man would continue to search for a way to end it? And if we all do die just "because", why even bother TO search for a means not to? Why look for cures for illnesses, such as cancer, AIDS, smallpox, plague, etc.? Why not just accept the inevitable: that it was the person's TIME to die, or worse, that God "took them"? Not that I'm saying it was or that He did - neither is true. Including old age.
So, again, what do YOU think is the reason we die? And why shouldn't we be any different... but perhaps just, well, give in to it (as you seem to suggest)? And if it can't BE changed, why are we looking for ways TO change it?
And why look in only place for that/those way(s)?
A slave of Christ,
SA
Sorry for answering a question directed to you, Shelby, I'm just trying to help another person understand some things so that they may see that you indeed are being truthful!
You owe ME absolutely NO apology, dear CJ (peace to you, as well, dear one!). I don't think the person in question misunderstood, though. If he did, then I owe HIM an apology: I should have broken it down and made it a bit more... mmmmm... elementary... for him. I think, though, that he wants others to think he didn't understand. Although, it could be, though, that my Lord isn't allowing him to understand it , so... but, well, Lord help me if I were to even suggest such a thing...
Shelby didn't say that there is such a person but it would be more accurate to refer to him by another name.
Did I have to?
She said - "When I came to know the One many CALL "Jesus" I came to know that "Jesus" has never done anything for me... because there is no such person."
I did. Because there isn't, at least not as to the Son of God. And I don't tend to call on any others named "Jesus." Even if his last name is, say, Martinez...
That is very different from simply objecting to the correct form of address.
No, it isn't. That's just what you want people to believe. You couldn't undermine my faith... or what I shared... with your usual arguments and reasonings (because those don't work), and so now you want to undermine others by using me ("Oooh, looky, you believers in Jesus! She said there is no Jesus!"). You should be ashamed that that's the best you can come up with. Even I gave you more credit than that. Obviously, I shouldn't have.
This is clear from what she said next... "there is no "Jesus."Else, he would ANSWER everyone CALLING on him."
Which is true. But let me ask you and you tell us, please: who do YOU say it is that answers those who call on Jesus? And if no one so answers... why not?
If christians were praying to the correct person but using a less than perfect form of his name you would not expect the son of god would ignore them for that reason would you?
Does it matter what we expect... or what is true? Did you expect "Jehovah" to answer YOU? DID "he"? If he did... then how can you say he doesn't exist? If he didn't... why do YOU say he didn't? Did you expect "Jesus" to answer YOU? DID he? If he did... then how can YOU say he does not exist? If he did... then why do YOU say he didn't?
Shelby is claiming much more than special insight in how to pronounce the name. She is saying Christians receive nothing because they are praying to somebody who does not exist.
Shelby is claiming neither: she has no special insight; the name is out there for any who WANT to know what it is... and use it... to know and use. Shelby didn't make the name up. And Shelby has NEVER said that christians receive nothing. Indeed, christians DO receive. Now, that some who do not receive CALL themselves "christians"... well, my Lord himself responded to that one:
"Not everyone who calls out to me, 'Lord! Lord!' will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. In that day, many will say to me 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many great works in your name?' And I will say to them, 'I never knew you; get away from me, you workers of lawlessness.'" Matthew 7:21-23
Now, another writer states that no one can say "[Jesus] is Lord, except by holy spirit." However, MANY have said "Jesus is Lord!"... yet, their actions decry the spirit that is claimed to be behind such. Even so, as you see above, Christ is recorded to have said that even some of those who call him "Lord"... would not belong to him, that HE did not know THEM. So just because someone calls on Christ... regardless of what name they use... doesn't mean they belong to him, know him... or are even known BY him.
And yet christians still view her as a fellow believer.
Christians, yes. Some who profess to be so... not so much. Certainly the GB of the WTBTS, who claim to be anointed, let alone "christians" don't view me as such. Nor do some who profess similar here.
Back on topic - There is a hint in the gospels when the Jews say something to the effect that "we know who our father is..." There may have been an implied taunt that Jesus didn't.
They were referring to Abraham. And they were indeed so implying. Because they were claiming that, as descendants of Abraham, they were the keepers of the Law, not just technically, but literally. That as Abraham's "seed", no young upstart was going to tell THEM how they were acting against God. But he replied and told them whose seed they really were... didn't he?
Did Jesus look like a Roman soldier who raped his mother?
In the flesh, he could have looked like a number of folks. Even today, though, we know that looks, even though often held up as proof of paternity, mean absolutely nothing. Paternity is established by blood... not looks. Surely, you know the science of THAT particular truth.
Its a more likely explanation for the mystery around his paternity than myths about virgin births.
It is. And all are entirely entitled to believe... and put faith... in what they will. As well as who. If you wish to believe that he was the bastard son of a Roman soldier, who's to stop you? If you want to believe that Mary and Joseph had premarital sex and concocted a story to cover their "sin"... by all means, do so. Were I an atheist I'm not sure I would care one way or the other. I know that, as a christian, I don't care what other believe, except to the extent that it's a lie about the Most Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies... and His Son and Christ, the Holy One of Israel and Holy Spirit, JAHESHUA, the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah).
Even in that light, I only care that when speaking about these folks speak the truth. NOT because it makes ME anything... but because I love them... and want people to know the truth ABOUT them... because it really is wonderful. If they don't know it, then I will share what I received FROM the Truth in the hopes that perhaps they will know and, as a result, perhaps go to that One and learn from him themselves. If they do... great. If they don't... or know WANT to know... no worries: it's not up to me that they get it... or get called... or hear the call... or respond to the call... or get chosen... anyway. I can't even lead the horse, let alone make it drink - I can only point it in the direction of some "water".
one thing more, however, and that is the false "jesus" that some have created. Such as the "jesus" who wants you to go to war, or to shun your loved ones, or to judge others, or the "jesus" that is going to kill and burn people in hell for eternity, etc. That "jesus" does not exist.
Nope, that one, either, dear tec (the greatest of love and peace to you, as well!).
A slave of Christ,
SA
Many different things cause death, I am sure. To be honest, I am not interested in having a discussion in which science will be misrepresented, words suddenly take on new meaning as needed, the final authority is an auditory hallucination and every sentence an exercise in extreme obfuscation to avoid saying anything directly or meaningful.
Have a pleasant evening.
