The Bible vs Zionist Conspiracy

And even more funny how God promised that whatever nation refuses to serve the Jews will be destroyed (Isaiah 60:12).

Yes but the reject jesus and the bible says you ca t have the father with out the son

If so, then their history within their scripture would be most flattering.

But it isn't.

ON THE JEWS: THE CHOSEN PEOPLE OF GOD

What I mean is, if the Bible was biased towards the Jews, then it wouldn't include marring and scandalous details that can easily be used against them, but would have been taken as a work of propaganda.

This isn't the case.

You read the bible, and it presents a far more negative image of the Jews than any would be comfortable with.

While there's an obvious benefit to being called the chosen people of God, which places them above all people in anyone's mind, there is also a negative aspect of it as well. Why, because unlike the un-elected nations, they bear the heavy responsibility of representing God's righteousness (Isaiah 42:6). It is through them that God used
to demonstrate His goodness before the world.

For that responsibility, they are blessed materialistically, as a show of how God can bless nations who trust and obey Him. However, they are more severely punished if they disobey Him (Deuteronomy 27-28).

Now recall how unflattering their history is in scripture.... they've failed in that responsibility far more than they did in bearing it faithfully (Psalms 106 & Romans 2:17-24).

The Jews were never chosen because they were better in terms of numbers or worth, in fact, He had said they're a "Stiff-necked people", but God simply chose them to affect His will (Deuteronomy 7:7-9, 9:6-18, & Romans 9:16).

Arguably, God chose the least of the people-group to demonstrate His magnanimity.

WRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRONG.

NOT the Chosen People Of God, but the Chosen People of the God name Yahweh, who, coincidentally, just so happened to be their tribal God.

The concept of a one God comes form the first monotheistic religion, Zoroastrianism, who, coincidentally, Jews began to develop their concept of a single God instead of a tribal one of many after becoming part of their Achaemenid Empire. The first Messiah, in fact, and the only Gentile one, was their King, Cyrus the Great.

The word and concept of Paradise came from them, as did that of the eternal struggle between good vs evil, the Apocalypse... And then there's Mithra, who bares an uncanny resemblance to Jesus, only the former was born far earlier. And get this, the Cult of Mithras was swidely practiced in, yup, Rome, 2000 years ago. Praying with hands clasped, incense, the eternal flame, even the Pope's tiara - all Zoroastrian. Yes, your 'one God who chose the Jews' is modeled after an Iranian one.

Ironic, isn't it?

PS: Wanna believe the Word as given onto the Chosen and preached by Jesus? Cool, then do it. Stick to the Torah. The rest of the Bible is a bunch of Saul/Paul Roman propaganda. Born of the Jackal, seated in Rome, who stole the religion of the Chosen and called it their own, but not before corrupting it beyond recongnition? Yes, the Bible did predict that one correctly.

PART 2

Another, more compelling reasons it is not so, is that Jesus is one who goes against the grain of Jewish thought.

1st, The Jews were desperately waiting for the conquering King, who would free them from brutal Roman occupation. They were expecting another David. But Jesus presented Himself as the redeemer, instead of the coming King (that was also His claim, but regulated that to the future time). That is the last thing the Jews have wanted.

2nd, if anyone claimed themselves as God, they're immediately stoned to death. Jesus claimed to be God, and the Jews tried to stone Him (John 10:30-38). The Jews were fiercely monotheistic, so the notion of someone claiming deity, is utterly blasphemous to them.

"Praying with hands clasped, incense, the eternal flame, even the Pope's tiara - all Zoroastrian. Yes, your 'one God who chose the Jews' is modeled after an Iranian one."

The Jews prayed with arms open, and clasped hands are a universal tendency when begging for something of need. Lastly, ... I am not a Catholic.

"Wanna believe the Word as given onto the Chosen and preached by Jesus? Cool, then do it. Stick to the Torah. The rest of the Bible is a bunch of Saul/Paul Roman propaganda. Born of the Jackal, seated in Rome, who stole the religion of the Chosen and called it their own, but not before corrupting it beyond recongnition? Yes, the Bible did predict that one correctly."

It is the Torah, that proved Jesus is who He said He is.

Jesus preached the Word of God. That is what he did, that was his stated purpose.

The Jews awaited a Messiah, something - despite what has been said by Christains - Jesus was not, having accomplished not one single Messianic thing ever.

Jesus never claimed to be God. He never even claimed to be the son of God either.
The closest was with Pilate asking him if he was the son of... , Jesus replying, "It is you who say I am"

Again, yes, like I said. The Christains pray differently from Jews but like Zoroastrains. You keep attempting to disagree with me by verifying what I had stated.

The Torah makes no mention of Jesus nor reference of anyone even vaguely resembling him.

Based off the bible you are a fool.

Foolish, yes; but remember that we were all fools prior to our conversion (Ephesians 2:2-3).

That's why I like him. God is my inspiration for everything but since I'm sinner I can never be such.
But I truly love Comfort he is a big warrior in this evil age. I'm sure the California government wants him locked up lol.
Modern day mini paul

It wouldn't surprise me at all they do! States like California is really dangerous. From the beginning, I'm sure they meant well; but the danger lies in increased power

Well yes of course. You're right I'm being a bit to judgemental rather than being loving in a Ray Comfort way

I apologize, but I need to be sure you don't use that word so freely. Many do qualify as, and they do need to be called out as such, but we need to be careful how we appear before the world.

I've heard of very rude, or very confrontational street preachers who would name call their detractors in such excess, that it appeared as if they were just itching to be persecuted.

And it wouldn't surprise me that they are; to gain attention and following they crave.

Ray Comfort, great that you're following his example! His style of preaching is both patient, loving, and just as importantly, does not water down the Gospel!

Well the problem is in Connecticut there are very good churches and weve tried. What I personally have an issue is that churches live by a denomination rather than the bible. I believe contact with other believers is good too.
Times it feels like Elijah with the 3000 belivers

The two of you need to get past denominationism... we're all in the same fight.

Yeah I am

I agree. We have family bible studies me my mom and dad and 2 sister

Well, that makes you and yours a "Fire Team" lol! I'll pray that you and your family will find a good church, and if the Lord wills, icing on top (doxology you all love, and not just tolerate)

Hey I agree again but other dont. And some take that to the extreme point that all get to heaven

That's true. Some are not as inclusive as they should be with fellow believers, and some are extreme as you've said.

My advice is to keep looking. If God wants you to be a member of a congregation (and He does), you will find it. Please, just don't give up on your search.

No like I have said although I'd be mostly an anabaptist I consider myself a follower of Christ not a congregation.
Believe or not my dad has basically has been unwanted from church because of his view on the bible. Mostly because the pastor was a bit of a control freak. Also we had problems with the youth leader.
I wanted to go to the adult Sunday school but as i was going upstairs the youth leader said are coming in and I said no I'm going upstairs because I'm interested in the adult service. He got upset and said you're a teen you belong here. Then he yelled at my mom.
My dad who didn't really care for him (other reasons I dont care to discuss) who want there (having stomach issues) was PO'd and that was it so.
Yeah basically my family doesn't fit in because we take things quite seriously. My family also isn't crazy about the music not necessarily the style but the words aren't that spiritual. People dont want to talk about the bible, and when people do the pastor gets upset with someone teaching someone a member. So y

My mistake, I've failed to notice that detail.

I'm sorry for the experiences you and your father had, while at that congregation. The pastor definitely sounded like a toxic leader, as well as that youth leader; and the fact that they did not want to discuss anything of scripture is equally disturbing.

How long ago was the day you both left the church? And, am I right to say that neither of you looked for other churches?

Yes. Hey the thread is dying. Post a meme so we can strike a new one

Yeah. Might be tough with work and trying to go to college. Trying g to be a MRI technician so can raise a family and my wife can stay home.
But I gotta read the good book

Amen; yes, it's going to be tough. The higher you go in education, the harder it is. I'll try to have a new meme up very soon.

Well this was maybe 2 years back. Yeah my dad feels like Gid isn't calling him. Also he goes not to learn but to help believers that's his goal. But most people dont want help. Also we have speculations that that church has free masons.
Because a family that became members very fast had a Facebook post with a square and compass.
No were sent looking for a church main8cause no good ones around

With such a congregation as the one you've left, finding Free Masons there wouldn't be shocking; in fact, anyone from the spiritual zoo can come in and be members of.

When you said that no were no good ones around, you mean you've looked, but discovered that none of them met your criteria? If so, how bad were they?

Well I only need an A.D luckily and training so

Wow, you're more fortunate than most. There are jobs in the medical field I realized, that doesn't require long years of schooling.

I agree. Problem is westbro doesn't help

Yes; groups like Westboro really hurt our image. They're the minority, thankfully, but have such loud voices in terms of extremity that they've gained media attention.

Thanks to them, we can not plead for the LGBTQ community to repent and believe in Christ without being numbered with Westboro.

I want to ask you this, and I know I've asked it before but I need to be sure. Are you part of a congregation?

I know you're an Anabaptist, but the last time we've spoken of church, you seemed to be adamently against church participation and membership.

Listen new England is called the frozen chosen for a reason

I know the latter is the most extreme, but the importance of church membership I could not express enough of. No believer is a successful Rambo in spiritual warfare; we're meant to serve in a unit, which has a number of components but all vital to the mission at hand.

I'm not part of anything, but I just want to convey my point through the following illustration.

Imagine, you and your father, are the only operators in no man's land suddenly you're about to get overrun by a force seemingly 5x your size. Are you going to survive this firefight, no because you have no intelligence, no supply, no reenforcements, no QRF, no medical support, no mechanized support (scout vehicles to tanks), no indirect support (mortars to artillary), no air support, and no naval support. And lets say you do have everything that I've mentioned, you just don't have the chain of command to make that happen.

Now you're running low on ammunition, the weapon of your comrade jammed, he is shot and bleeding out. .

Spiritual Warfare is far deadlier because unlike the physical battlefield, you can't see your enemy 100% of the time, and you don;t know if he's even attacking you.

I apologize if you feel that I'm too pushy. The reason for my asking, is because I want to encourage you both to join a congregation because of scripture

I don't know the extent to how they've hurt you and your father, but please know that first, not all congregations are like the one you've experienced, and two, church membership is a spiritual necessity.

We not only need to hear the preaching, but fellowship with believers who've had a wide range of experience; with strengths and weaknesses you can both benefit from, and help others in spiritual need (Romans 12).

I'm sure you know this already, but two years is an awfully long time, and you seemed disturbingly determined not to look any more (Hebrews 10:25).

Worse, your father felt that God isn't calling him to find a congregation? Can he justify that with scripture, it is like a Christian woman wanting to date and marry an unbeliever because she felt God wanted her to do it. She could argue that she might be the only person to be a catalyst for his conversion, or that by marrying him, she'll eventually influence him to convert (in fact, that's a common rationale given by), but all the same, she's acting against clear prohibition of scripture (2 Corinthians 6:14-18).

Now you require that the congregation ought to be in scripture, that good and s the first thing to look for. But other things is secondary to it.

Both of you are Anabaptists, maybe a move to a Baptist congregation would not be so bad. Another a Congregational, or even a Reformed congregation because we're all Protestants.

If however, there really no good churches out there, as all of them deny the inspiration and authority of scripture, and frown upon church discipline, perhaps start your own church... or move?

I agree I cannot believe that gays and bisexuals and trans get into heaven. But former knes are as stated in the bible. However we must remember that Paul had member who were gay then changed.
I'm sure Jesus ate with them.
So we must shield love to then as my grandfather wisely said we should tolerate them as in out up with them respect them as humans, love them since Christ does. But Not to agree with there lifestyle

Perhaps, and more likely because some of of Paul's missionary companions were Romans or Greeks (the Greeks, then the Romans influenced by them, had temple rituals that involved sexual immorality) but I don't recall scripture saying that some of Paul's companions were former homosexuals.

Yes, I think probably He ate with them. The chances of that is smaller however, since Homosexuality was far less tolerated in Palestine ("Philistia" in Latin; the Romans deliberately attempted to disassociate the Jews from their historic name). Still, among the "Tax Collectors and Sinners" of whom Jesus ate and drank with might have had Homosexuals among them.

And, wonderful that your Grandfather told you that. We do need to tolerate them as they are fellow human beings, but toleration doesn't mean we also accept their lifestyle. Being tolerant (tolerating what is disagreeable) doesn't mean accepting their sin as an acceptable lifestyle.

Well I ment I Roman's when he list the sins and says "as such were some of you"

You're welcome.

When you've used the word, "Member", I'm assuming that it had to be ones close to him.

Paul did not lead a congregation, he was a traveling missionary evangelist; so any member had either to be one or more of his missionary companions or disciples like Barnabas and Timothy.

I'm sorry thanks for the correction. I should have worded it better.

PART 1

"NOT the Chosen People Of God, but the Chosen People of the God name Yahweh, who, coincidentally, just so happened to be their tribal God.

Yes, any tribe can declare themselves "God's chosen" until proven so. God certainly proved Himself via the Jewish people.

"The concept of a one God comes form the first monotheistic religion, Zoroastrianism, who, coincidentally, Jews began to develop their concept of a single God instead of a tribal one of many after becoming part of their Achaemenid Empire. The first Messiah, in fact, and the only Gentile one, was their King, Cyrus the Great."

If Zoroastrianism is the first monotheistic religion, that is not an absolute proof that the Jews got their concept from them. It strongly suggests it so, but the fact that the two religions differ fundamentally from each other in more ways than one is a greater proof of otherwise.

"The word and concept of Paradise came from them, as did that of the eternal struggle between good vs evil, the Apocalypse...."

Zoroastrians have a dualistic notion of the existence of good and evil in terms of equal strengths. That is not shared in scripture as God is the supreme ruler over all creation, and Satan cannot do a thing without God's permission (Read Job ch 1 & 2).

".... And then there's Mithra, who bares an uncanny resemblance to Jesus, only the former was born far earlier. And get this, the Cult of Mithras was swidely practiced in, yup, Rome, 2000 years ago. ...."

Chronological appearance doesn't always mean that neighboring other gain inspiration from. One example is in WWII when America and the Germans invented Night Vision optics. Chronologically, the Americans were the first to invent it in 1942 but does that mean that the Germans copied the Americans? No. And there were no evidence to support that notion.

No, not THE God - a God. The Torah treats the notion of other Gods as a given.

The Jews got their religion from their Canaanite ancestors and Babylonian captors.
The later adoption of the concept of a universal supreme being was a result of a later Zoroastrian influence.

Once again, the influence. The dualtistic notion of good & evil entered Judaism and blossomed in Christianity because of Zorastrian influence.

With Mithra and Jesus, we're talking a succession WITHIN Rome. Mithra originated in Iran, but had become a cult in Rome which preceeded Christianity. One came first and was replaced by the other which managed to somehow ending up resembling it more than it did its own parent religion.

"No, not THE God - a God. The Torah treats the notion of other Gods as a given."

Have you read the scriptures to be sure of that claim?

"The Jews got their religion from their Canaanite ancestors and Babylonian captors. The later adoption of the concept of a universal supreme being was a result of a later Zoroastrian influence." .... "Once again, the influence. The dualtistic notion of good & evil entered Judaism and blossomed in Christianity because of Zorastrian influence.":

Well, again, just because Zoroastrianism appeared first in written history doesn't mean the Jews borrowed ideas from them.

With that said, though it is believed to be the first monotheistic religion, the founder of that religion, Zarathushtra, was roughly born in 1200 BC (1) while another source gave a rough estimate of when the religion began... from 1500 BC to 700-630 BC. Abraham, on the other hand was born in 1830 BC (3) according to one site, and the other, 1800 BC.

It may well be the first popular Monotheistic religion, but as far as it being the first ... Judaism is the one most likely.

"With Mithra and Jesus, we're talking a succession WITHIN Rome. Mithra originated in Iran, but had become a cult in Rome which preceeded Christianity.
...."

Well, unless you can prove that Jesus traveled into Rome, or had contacted believers of Mithra, you can only suppose a link. And remember, Jesus was prophesied in the OT who is He (Isaiah 9:6) how He'll be born (Isaiah 7:14) from where He will be born (Micah 5:2), what He will do (Deuteronomy 18:18), when He will die (Daniel 9:26), why He will die (Isaiah 53:5-6), the manner of His death (Psalm 22), and the fact that He rise again from the dead (Psalm 16:10)

1. "Frequently asked questions on Zoroastrianism and the Avesta" from Avesta - Zoroastrian Archive http://www.avesta.org/zfaq.html
2. "Zoroastrianism" Khan Academy https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/ancient-medieval/ancient-persia/v/zoroastrianism
3. "Timeline of Jewish History" from Chabad.org https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/3915966/jewish/Timeline-of-Jewish-History.htm#q2
4. "Abraham" from Jewish Virtual Library "https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/abraham

I'll deal with the next tomorrow.

He s/he and Octavia are big trouble makers when it comes to more conservative views. I've posted several pro life memes in the political stream and Octavia is brutal also goes in circles when presented with facts

Thank you. Having looked at the three posts it appeared to me that he, seemed to be a reasonable person.

From his many writings he is listening which showed in his responses by readily acknowledging the merits of the other's points but maintained his own nevertheless.

There were instances where he simply refused to believe the other's argument; or if unable to rebut, continued to push his premise, but overall a decent person.

I guess. It is hard to talk to him

Hmmm... I can definitely Vagabond doing that, but not Octavia.... S/he seemed much more respectful than most Atheists/Agnistics I've met.

I'll have a look at your Pro-Life memes.

He Octavia is more respectful, but does ignore facts or as the bible says hardness of heart but does ask some.good questions

Other than Octavia ignoring facts, what other difficulties do you have with him?

That's about it. Also if you check his account all lot my little pony. I believe he is bisexual he said so

OK, you have a lot more memes than I thought. Could you please post me your Pro-Life meme(s) that included Octavia?

Boy that's been awhile. Do this go on my profile and click view images. There should be a box to select streams hit the political stream and then scroll down. Look for one that has a lot of comments

I'm afraid that's equally daunting. But you can go to your Notifications; you should more quickly find his comments to you in relations to Abortion. Then, post here.

Can you do that?

Lemme see what I can find

https://imgflip.com/i/34d5gd I'll see if I can dig up any more

https://imgflip.com/i/34d5kv not sure if Octavia is in this, but some other people were in a war

https://imgflip.com/i/32uukj here is another

I see. I saw that, as he was asked what sexual orietation was. OK, thank you for telling me what you know.

Over the years, I've met far more arrogant atheists, slobbering with sacasim, like Vagabond Souffe (are you listening, ... Vagabond?), than I have with the likes of Octavia.

So I definitely appreciate Octavia as he is sadly, a rarity. I would show more patience with him than any of his fellows.

Yeah I've realized ge is chill. But is still foolish

Have you?
"And we shall make them in ___ image"
The 1st & 2nd Commandent say what about other Gods?

But I don't care what some Italian monk guestimated in 1453AD about some figures of which after centuries of searching there is absolutely no evidence that they existed?
But if you want, when was Moses supposedly born?
When were the Commandements given to him?
Who was his flock worshipping?

Jesus in Rome wha? Oh, you mean the place his cult started?
No, wait, Judea was in Rome? Gaagh, you almost got me!
Those are prophecies of Jesus's birth? Who are Jew (see what I did there?) kidding?

"Well, again, just because Zoroastrianism appeared first in written history doesn't mean the Jews borrowed ideas from them. "

^ Love this. "Sure, historically we know that it's a historical fact that Zoroastrianism appeared first in history, but I'mma ignore that because it contradicts the point I am not making"

This is going in circles, and your argument is that you'd rather ignore documented historical fact despite it lending some validity to the notion of a one God which goes farther back via other religions, that contradicts the notion that God was invented by the Romans as a political tool. And that is, after all, the whole point of ROMAN Catholicism and the rest of the bastardized corruption that Christianity (The Beast, Son of the Jackal seated in Rome) centers on.

the place where* his cult

Don't mind zevi lol, he's just laughing

"Have you?
"And we shall make them in ___ image"
The 1st & 2nd Commandent say what about other Gods?"

If you've looked at the verses give, about who He is, then you would've seen that He's not an ordinary prophet but God. Also, while there is only one God, and yes, no other god we should go before Him, the OT is also clear that there are persons... within the godhead.

The OT evidenced the doctrine of the Trinity; one God in three persons: the Father (Genesis 1:1 & Isaiah 43:10), the Son, (Genesis 1:26 & Isaiah 44:6), and the Holy Spirit (Genesis 1:2 & Isaiah 48:16-17).

In fact, in the Jewish Shema (declaration) "Here O Israel, the LORD God (Elohim), the Lord is one". Notice please, that Elohim is not in the singular form of "El" or "Eloh", but Eloh-im. A common response to this is that Elohim speaks more of “Plural Majesty”, but that interpetation does not fit in the context of that passage.

“But I don't care what some Italian monk guestimated in 1453AD about some figures of which after centuries of searching there is absolutely no evidence that they existed?”

Clearly, you haven’t bothered to look at the given sources.

“But if you want, when was Moses supposedly born?”
“When were the Commandements given to him?”
“Who was his flock worshipping?”

If you’re asking answers to those questions then you need only to look at the sources provided. If however you are not satisfied with them and demand greater detail, then press your issues with any reputable historians on ancient history.

They will tell you that writers of antiquity do not have the same scholarly standards as we do today. And given the natural scarcity of paper, they could not afford to take up any more space to provide present and future readers precise details of who, what, where, and when in an MLA or Chicago format.

“Jesus in Rome wha? Oh, you mean the place his cult started? "=
No, wait, Judea was in Rome? Gaagh, you almost got me!”

I don’t know if you’re naturally eccentric, or you are being sarcastically arrogant.

“Those are prophecies of Jesus's birth? Who are Jew (see what I did there?) kidding?”

Not quite, but I suggest you give me the same courtesy of respect as I’ve shown you. You may have a lot of good points to share, but I’m not about to waste my time with someone who would not reciprocate. I’ve dealt with Trolls before, as well as Atheists whose only intention is to bash Theists, and I have no way of knowing your intention but only by the way you presented .

The trinity father, son, holy spirit the three are one

Whoopee dee, Peewee knows the Sign of the Cross.

Oh, and we're done here, yes?

"Well, again, just because Zoroastrianism appeared first in written history doesn't mean the Jews borrowed ideas from them."

Luv, luv, luv this.

Yeah, we're done.

Yeah read the Hebrew version

I can tell it screwed your English up.
What are you saying?

S/he's messing with you. And right now I'm unable to tell if Vagabond is a Troll or not.

"Not necessarily. The point of the Bible isn't to make the Jews look awesome, it's to make God look awesome. The Jews mention their failings because it gives them more opportunities to point to God's mercy and stuff."

I think you've missed what I said on the fact that their history, written in scripture is so scandalous it can easily be used against them by their enemies.

Not that it isn't possible, but being a people surrounded by states that can one day turn on them it is vital to have a citizenry with a sense of pride and dignity with earned confidence.

So what better way accomplish that by depicting themselves more glorious than they really are. How God chose them because they've proved themselves more worthy than all other people. How they win, war after war, through spectacular battles led heroic figures God led to battle. And how the people as a whole more pious, learned, and generous than their neighbors.

And while scripture does feature those things, the negative far outweighs the positive.

"unlike the un-elected nations, they bear the heavy responsibility of representing God's righteousness"

"Ahh, the religious equivalent of "it's so exhausting being this amazing all the time".:"

With respect, you're being presumptuous. You concluded it so, even though you've never read the entire Bible yourself.

"The how come it's the Muslim nations that have all the oil in the Middle East? Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, United Arab Emirates, etc"

One of the people you've debated said that the rulers owned 80% of the wealth. Furthermore, it is not a good thing in the long run, to have a single natural resource with which one's entire economy depends on.

They're wealthy still, but blessings is not limited to that.

How literate and educated are their people? How's the job market faring? Are they ruled fairly? And lastly, what is the state of their military?

A state's longevity is dependent on the people. And right now, the Arab literacy rate is far below international levels, and their state is often ruled by a military dictatorship that knows how to suppress opposition but grossly ignorant on the economy.

"And yet nations that don't trust or obey him are very blessed."

While they do not believe in God, He does not judge them on that alone. Read Psalm 9:17, the ending of it. He also blesses them if they're righteous.

You know what based off the bible you are a fool

English. do. you. speak. it?