Links

Recommended Websites and Blogs:



588 thoughts on “Links

  1. mr.heathcliff

    any of you peoples bought this book ?

    Robert Miller, in Helping Jesus Fulfill Prophecy, analyzes the use of a “suffering servant passage” in gLuke & Acts.

    (page 173-174)

    […] it is instructive to consider briefly the scenes

    in Acts that narrate how people respond to the claim that Jesus fulfilled

    scripture. The lengthiest such scene (Acts 8:26–39) tells of a royal official

    from Ethiopia pondering a passage from Isaiah. When the apostle Philip,

    guided to the location by an angel, asks the official if he understands what

    he is reading, the man replies, “How can I unless someone explains it to

    me?” (Acts 8:31). Referring to one of Isaiah’s passages about the mysterious

    suffering servant (Isa 53:7–8), the Ethiopian asks Philip, “Of whom does the

    prophet say this—himself or someone else?” Philip seizes the opportunity:

    “he launched out with this passage as his starting point, telling him the good

    news about Jesus” (Acts 8:35). Before long the man asks Philip to baptize

    him on the spot (Acts 8:36). Luke here narrates an ideal scenario for how

    prophecy should point people to Jesus. Even so, the scene recognizes that

    the prophets (exemplified by Isaiah) are difficult to understand, and that

    one must learn how to interpret them from the standpoint of Christian faith

    before they can inspire belief in Jesus.

    Two other summary scenes in Acts are sufficient to show the variety

    of Jewish responses to the claim that Jesus fulfilled prophecy. In one (Acts

    17:10–12) the members of a Jewish synagogue “welcomed the message with

    great enthusiasm. Each day they studied the scriptures to see whether these

    claims were true, and many of them came to believe.” The other scene comes

    at the end of Acts. Paul is under house arrest in Rome, and the leaders of the

    Jewish community in that capital city

    arranged a day to meet with Paul. They visited him at his lodgings

    in great numbers. All day long he explained the matter to

    them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince

    them about Jesus from both the law of Moses and from the

    prophets. Some were convinced by what he had said, while others

    refused to believe. (Acts 28:23–24)

    The results are mixed. Luke is careful not to say that some were convinced

    by Paul and some were not; Luke instead tells us that some were convinced

    while others “refused to believe.”5.The Greek verb here –ēpistoun– is in the imperfect tense, which conveys the sense of a continuous action in the past. So it means more than that they did not believe. The lesson Luke imparts here is that once one has heard a gifted Christian preacher explain how Jesus fulfilled prophecy, the failure to believe can only be a willful act, a refusal to accept the evident truth.

    If one wonders why Luke chose to end Acts in a scene of mixed results—

    why not a scene in which all were persuaded?—it is because Luke

    has saved a trump card to play as the finale to his narrative. Paul gets the

    last word as he explains that the very refusal of some to believe that Jesus

    fulfilled prophecy is itself a fulfillment of prophecy (Acts 28:25–28). Thus,

    those Jews who resist prophecy unwittingly fulfill it. Luke’s understanding

    of the nature of prophecy is close to what we see in, for example, the Greek

    tragedy Oedipus Rex: humans are powerless to resist prophecy.6 Even those

    who consciously and willfully try to defeat prophecy end up fulfilling it

    against their will and in ways they do not understand at the time.

    Another version of this paradox is on display in two other scenes in

    Acts. In the middle of a long speech in the synagogue in Antioch in Pisidia,

    Paul says, “Because the residents of Jerusalem and their leaders did

    not recognize him or understand the words of the prophets that are read

    every Sabbath, they fulfilled those words by condemning him” (Acts 13:27).

    Note Paul’s logic here: it is because the Jerusalemites did not understand

    the prophets that they fulfilled their words. Similarly, in Jerusalem Peter

    announces, “Friends, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your

    rulers; in this way God fulfilled what he had foretold through all the prophets,

    that his messiah would suffer” (Acts 3:17–18). The implication here is

    startling, for it seems that if the people and their leaders had understood the

    prophecies, those prophecies would not have been fulfilled (note the “in this

    way”). According to Luke, God’s plan apparently required key players in it

    to be unaware of it. In these two scenes Jews are described as acting in ignorance,

    not as consciously defying God’s will (as in Acts 28). But even with

    this variation the theme is the same: God’s will, foretold by the prophets,

    will be accomplished, not only despite human ignorance and resistance, but

    even because of that ignorance and resistance.

    The narrative strategy in Acts is brilliantly designed to harness the

    power of prophecy to validate the Christian message: when people accept

    that Jesus fulfilled prophecy, they validate the prophetic truth of Christianity;

    and when people refuse to accept that Jesus fulfilled prophecy, they also

    validate the prophetic truth of Christianity.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. mr.heathcliff

    original sin stained filth bag like paul would never lie ?

    “because he persecuted Christians, he is a very good witness for the resurrection because he has no reason to lie.”

    I’ve heard this argument before, and it always struck me as odd. If his goal were to infiltrate the movement and refashion it (which he undeniably did), he would have a very strong motivation to lie.

    Like

  3. mr.heathcliff

    This was my comment on some Evangelical internet celebrity’s woefully ignorant post lying about the Prophet Muhammad (‎ﷺ) and calling for violence against Mosques:

    The Prophet Muhammad wasn’t a “slave trader”. Even his most harshest critics among historians don’t claim something as utterly dumb as this. Slavery existed in his time. There wasn’t a single society or civilization on earth where slavery wasn’t the norm in that time period. All throughout Biblical times this was the case and no Biblical Prophet, nor even Jesus Christ himself, did anything at all to change this or even mitigate it. The Prophet Muhammad, on the other hand, sought to at least mitigate it by commanding that slaves be treated the same as their masters and that slaves should be freed as an act of expiation for sins. The following is an authentic narration on this:

    “…I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a nice cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, ‘I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names.’ The Prophet said to me, ‘O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names? You still have some characteristics of the era of ignorance in you! Your slaves are your brothers and God has happened to put them under your hands. So whoever has a brother under his hands, he should feed him of what he eats, and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them to do things beyond their capacity and if you do ask them to labor, then help them.’’”
    [Bukhari Vol. 1, Book 2, Hadith 30]

    What becomes clear from this is that “slave” in the Islamic context is absolutely nothing like “slave” as it is understood in the English language. Unless you can point me to any other civilization that said to feed “slaves” with the same food you eat, dress them in the same clothes you wear, and get your behind out there to help them in their work.

    Not only will you find nothing this magnanimous in the Bible, this is what’s ACTUALLY in the Bible. Read on in horror:

    “Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for their wrongs, and there is no favoritism.”
    [Colossians 3:23-25]

    And this is the Bible on God commanding Moses to commit genocide, enslavement, and sex trafficking:

    “The Lord said to Moses, “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people….So Moses said to the people, “Arm some of your men to go to war against the Midianites so that they may carry out the Lord’s vengeance on them…They fought against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, AND KILLED EVERY MAN…THE ISRAELITES CAPTURED THE MIDIANITE WOMEN AND CHILDREN and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps. THEY TOOK ALL THE PLUNDER AND SPOILS, INCLUDING THE PEOPLE AND ANIMALS, AND BROUGHT THE CAPTIVES, SPOILS AND PLUNDER TO MOSES AND ELEAZAR the priest and the Israelite assembly at their camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from Jericho…

    Moses was angry with the officers of the army—the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds—who returned from the battle.

    ”Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them…“NOW KILL ALL THE BOYS. AND KILL EVERY WOMAN WHO HAS SLEPT WITH A MAN, BUT SAVE FOR YOURSELVES EVERY GIRL WHO HAS NEVER SLEPT WITH A MAN.””
    [The Bible, Numbers 31:1-18]

    So, as you believe that Jesus Christ is the human incarnate of the same God of the Old Testament, then this is JESUS commanding genocide, murder, rape, pillage and sex trafficking. There’s no slipping or sliding your way out of that one. Is Jesus God? If you answer “Yes” then he’s not only a slave trader but a commander of genocide, human trafficking, rape of children, and slavery. And how many children are we talking about here that Jesus, according to Christian belief, ordered to be enslaved for sex?

    “And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him.”
    [Numbers 31:35]

    Thirty-two THOUSAND little girls taken as slaves for sex.

    So…as Jesus said in Matthew 7:5:

    “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

    Liked by 3 people

  4. mr.heathcliff

    lol, zaman is going terminator mode :

    okay so it seems like you want a punting. I’m glad to give it to you. Sucking of a baby’s tongue is an ancient desert practice which in many instances a baby’s life depends on it. In the desert, a newborn baby’s tongue can dry and crack and, as a result, they can get infection and die. You can read more about this here:
    https://abuaminaelias.com/sucking-tongues-of-children/

    But since you want to make something innocuous as this scandalous, how about the Israelites sucking baby’s penises after circumcision? It’s called Metzitzah b’peh in Hebrew.
    From the Mishnah, the first compendium of laws of rabbinic Judaism (c. 200 CE): “We perform all the requirements of circumcision on the Sabbath: We circumcise, uncover, suck, and place a compress with cumin on it” (Sabbath 19b).
    The critical word here is the Hebrew word for suck: metzitzah.
    In the Talmudic commentary on this passage in the Mishnah (Shabbat 133b), the 4th century rabbi Papa of Babylon writes that failure to perform this suction is dangerous for the baby, and any mohel who neglects to perform the ritual should be fired.
    So, you want to find fault with the Prophet Muhammad (‎ﷺ) engaging in an ancient practice upon which babies’ survival depended upon, while the ancient Israelites, the Old Testament Prophets, and Jesus’ people all sucked babies penises? That’s utterly hilarious! You know, sucking babies penises after circumcision is even now such a prevalent practice that New York’s orthodox Jewish community was having an outbreak of herpes among babies!

    Liked by 2 people

      1. @StewWingedHussar, it’s just Trinitarian pseudo-historical claims, the argument is that Jews were historically not hostile to the idea of believing that there were two powers in heaven, well even if there was such belief then what suggests that this second power is necessarily another god? That’s the conclusion of the review

        “We have seen that Segal’s work on ‘two powers,’ although widely accepted and
        obviously a very important contribution to this field, is not without shortcomings, and at
        points the evidence is open to interpretations other than those argued for by Segal. We
        have also observed that there is no passage in the Mishnah or Tosefta which explicitly
        mentions ‘two powers’ or which requires reference to that heresy in order to be
        understood. Alleged connections between ‘two powers’ and early tannaim are also
        suspect in view of the late date of the documents which first associate them with the ‘two
        powers’ heresy. A plausible setting can be given to the ‘heresy’ and to the controversies
        it caused in the late second and subsequent centuries, when the issue of the relationship
        between God and creation became an issue of debate for philosophers, Christians and
        Gnostics. Therefore, there is good reason to conclude that the conceptualities later
        condemned as ‘two powers heresy’ (i.e. those involving God and a second figure who
        functions as God’s supreme divine agent) would not have been controversial in the first
        century. In short, our study suggests that it is anachronistic to interpret Jewish and
        Christian documents from this period as reflecting ‘two powers’ heresy”

        Like

  5. mr.heathcliff

    very INTERESTING comment here

    was SHEMA directed at OTHER yhwh manifestationss??

    [–]lionofyhwhABD | Israelite Religion 11 points 14 hours ago
    I think many of them would have been different manifestations of YHWH. We have lists from Ugarit of many different Baals and of many different Marduks from Mesopotamia. We know of at least YHWH of Teman and Samaria from Kuntillet ‘Ajrud. Presumably there is a YHWH of Jerusalem as well.

    permalinkembedsavereportreply

    [–]zanillamillaQuality Contributor 4 points 12 hours ago
    What do you think of the argument that the Shema was directed against such local manifestations?

    permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply

    [–]lionofyhwhABD | Israelite Religion 3 points 11 hours ago
    It’s possible. Deuteronomy and DtrH hate everything but YHWH in Jerusalem so it can include other YHWH manifestations while still including Baal, Asherah, etc.

    Like

  6. mr.heathcliff

    [–]hassh 11 points 14 hours ago
    I understand that these beings are elohim — not deities as such, but rather spiritual beings — as far as the Old Testament authors are concerned.

    permalinkembedsavereportreply

    [–]asaz989 5 points 12 hours ago
    Depends which authors you’re referring to – many parts of Genesis and Exodus, for example, were clearly written by people with fully polytheistic outlooks.

    permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply

    [–]hassh 3 points 11 hours ago
    May I have an example?

    permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply

    [–]arachnophilia 7 points 11 hours ago
    deut 32:8-9 DSS, psalm 82 are the most obvious examples

    OUCH!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. mr.heathcliff

      I addressed this issue nine years ago in the blog post below. I think the theory has only become strengthened by the passage of time and additional insight on ancient Israel. While my current thinking on Psalm 82 has changed somewhat in recent years (my forthcoming JBL article has more details), Deuteronomy 32:8–9 is pretty clear, and the separate divine profiles demonstrate pretty convincingly that there were two different deities in view. I discuss that in more detail in my second master’s thesis, which is linked to below as well.

      https://danielomcclellan.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/decoupling-yhwh-and-el/

      Click to access 256182_pdf_246075_57AF479C-6921-11E3-BFD1-EA582E1BA5B1_mcclellan_d.pdf

      Like

  7. mr.heathcliff

    https://t.co/GqvjJB9nrZ?amp=1

    i asked ken temple the liar for jesus, did the torah help one deal with lust, hate and anger? the scum bag said that yhwh couldn’t move the hearts and minds of the yahood for thousands of years, they “all fell short”

    but the jew in the video trashes paul and ken temple and the calls into question what use was there of jesus’ “sacrifice” if torah leads to eternal life ?

    “god so loved the world that he send his eternal guidance that who so ever obeys shall have eternal life”

    Liked by 2 people

  8. stewjo004

    So been kicking this idea around or a while and wanted some feedback. I’m starting to think there weren’t12 disciples. According to the Gnostics, the world was created by an evil spirit named “Ruha” and Ruha gave birth to the 12 zodiac signs and 7 planets (that’s what was believed how many planets there were at the time).

    https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/58075828/jesus-was-a-wicked-priest-and-john-the-baptist-was-the-true-christ

    And what would you know the NT has the 12 disciples (who are called the 12) appointing 7 followers (called the 7) at the Pentecost:

    https://www.thecompassnews.org/2015/04/the-seven-appointed-by-the-twelve/

    When this is coupled with the Talmud (which admittedly is late they say Isa(as) had 5 disciples when they attempted to kill him)

    “And it is tradition: On the eve of the Passover Yeshu the Nazarene was hung. But the herald went forth before him for the space of forty days, while he cried, “Yeshu the Nazarene goes forth to be stoned, because he has practiced sorcery and seduced Israel and led them astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and give information concerning it.” But no plea was found for him, and so he was hung on the eve of Passover. Ulla said, “But do you think that there could be anything in his favor? He was a seducer, and the All Merciful has said, ‘You shall not spare him, nor conceal him.’ (Deut. 13:8). “However, in Jesus’ case it was different, because he was near to the kingdom”.

    “Our Rabbis have taught, Jesus had five disciples — Matthai, Nekai, Netzer, Buni, and Thodah. ..”
    https://www.premier.org.uk/Blogs/Yeshua-Explored/Jesus-in-the-Talmud

    Thoughts?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Vaqas Rehman

      Sounds interesting but i don’t have the necessary knowledge or experience to guess how historical the theory would be. If anyone here is a member of Dr. Ehrman’s blog or has the ability to shoot him an email, maybe ask his input on the number of disciples. personally at the moment i think 12 is possible because in Matthew 19:28 jesus(a.s) allegedly says-

      -“Truly I tell you, in the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on His glorious throne, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.-”

      judas betrayed him and other people are said to become apostles. to quote the Pulpit commentary

      “Twelve thrones. Judas forfeited his position; Matthias and Paul and Barnabas were afterwards added to the apostolic band; so that the number twelve must not be pressed as defining and limiting. Rather it expresses the completeness of the judicial body, regarding not so much the persons as the position of its members.”

      I believe Dr ehrman said this is relevant because a scribe probably wouldn’t invent it due to the obvious issues of the exact number 12. if i find the exact quote i’ll post it here.

      Note that i don’t think this is a false prophecy per say sine we have something similar in our tradition about the prophet(s.a.w.) saying certain people could potentially be in the fire when they later became muslim.

      Narrated Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud. Ibrahim said, “Al-Dahhak ibn Qays intended to appoint Masruq as governor. Thereupon Umarah ibn Uqbah said to him: Are you appointing a man from the remnants of the murderers of Uthman? Masruq said to him, ‘Ibn Mas‘ud narrated to us, and he was trustworthy in respect of traditions, that when the Prophet, blessings and peace be upon him, intended to kill your father, he said: Who will look after my children?’ He replied: ‘Fire. I also like for you what the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, liked for you.’”

      [Sunan Abu Dawud 2686]

      Liked by 1 person

      1. stewjo004

        @ Vaqas

        I’ve wanted to but never had the energy to join.

        However, is an argument for a scribe making something up isn’t really strong they don’t catch things alll the time when they alter stuff but Allah hu alim. I just don’t see this a friendly coincidence seeing as they list all the demiurge in “John’s” famous prologue:

        1. In the “Beginning” (Arche), in which was
        2. the “Word” (Logos), in which was
        3. Life (Zoe), which was the “light” of
        4. Man (Anthropon), which included
        5. Grace (Charis), and
        6. Truth (Aletheia)
        Arche was also known as the Only-begotten Son (Monogenes), being the first and only-begotten Son of
        8. the unknown Father (John 1:18, 17:25).

        Liked by 1 person

  9. mr.heathcliff

    this is from colin turner’ face book page:

    One of the root meanings of the word ‘forgiveness’ is concerned with ‘giving up’ or ‘leaving off’. In the context of ‘shirk’ – which is setting up ‘partners’ for the Creator – the fact that this is the one sin which cannot be forgiven may stem from the fact that once it has taken root, it is almost impossible to give up or leave off. Once we assign partners to God, the more habituated we become to these ‘partnerships’, the more entrenched they become and the more difficult they are to remove.

    I am not talking about worshiping idols of wood or stone here, by the way. Assigning ‘partners’ to God starts out with the seemingly innocent idea that causes can create, for example, or that your power, or your beauty, or your knowledge, is actually your own. That is how ‘setting up partners for God’ begins. If you really think that you are the one creating your actions when you move, or that you are the one expressing knowledge when you write, or that you are the one showing compassion when you are kind to people, then you are setting yourself up as God’s partner. You may be setting yourself up as partner, or you may be setting others up as partners. Endorsing a governmental system that does not judge according to the word of the Creator is another way in which you assign partners to Him. Allowing your children to be brought up by secularising educators is another way in which you parcel up God’s attributes and spread them around.

    Assigning ‘partners’ to God is unforgivable not because it offends God. It is unforgivable because, once it is deep-rooted, it is almost impossible to ‘give up’ or ‘leave off’. And once that happens, there may be no road back. Ever.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s