Did Jesus Know He was Starting a New Movement?

[irosie91]

I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?

Luke 12:49 comes to mind:

"I've come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already ablaze!"

Indeed, this is the eschatology of the entire New Testament. Jesus would return in judgment. He baptized in fire in AD 70, when the temple burned and the Mosaic Age ended.

Paganism was still the same - no growth.

Christianity's opportunity to bloom arrived in this fire.

you seem to like sophistry

You seem to like to rebut sans any rebuttal.

baptized in fire? <<< that one does not make sense either.
VERY BABYLONIAN. Jesus was out to "end the mosaic age"
.......whatevah that is

 

[norwegen]

He was about the church. That was his mission. It's what he died for.

what word did Jesus use for "the church" ?

In English, church, of course. One verse signifying that has already been cited a number of times.

Much more often, though, Jesus referred to it as the kingdom.

Jesus did not know English-----it is likely that he did not know greek
either------as described in the NT, he was literate in both Hebrew
and Aramaic. WORDS are important in understanding------
just WAT A WRITING MEANS. Jesus referred to WHAT as
"the kingdom"? and what is the WORD he used?

The church is the Kingdom. Are you lost?

He used the word kingdom (in Aramaic, of course). In Greek, which is the language of the Gospels, the word is basileía.

so you don't know. You are guessing that Jesus claimed
he had founded a "kingdom" stated in Aramaic which is also
"church" In Hebrew it is mamlekhah-----sorta "that which is of
a king" ------at that time a country ruled by a king-----probably similar
in Aramaic. At that time Rome was ruled by a king-----it was a kingdom

The kingdom was his message. The kingdom - the church - is what resulted.

 

[norwegen]

I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?

Luke 12:49 comes to mind:

"I've come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already ablaze!"

Indeed, this is the eschatology of the entire New Testament. Jesus would return in judgment. He baptized in fire in AD 70, when the temple burned and the Mosaic Age ended.

Paganism was still the same - no growth.

Christianity's opportunity to bloom arrived in this fire.

you seem to like sophistry

You seem to like to rebut sans any rebuttal.

baptized in fire? <<< that one does not make sense either.
VERY BABYLONIAN. Jesus was out to "end the mosaic age"
.......whatevah that is

You're a Jew, yes?

I don't imagine it does make sense to you.

 

[Taz]

Pick a story, any story.

I asked you. You pick one.

The one about getting to an invible being through him.

"No one comes to the Father except through me" (Jn 14:6). That one?

Jesus is declaring something. What makes it a tale?

It's bullshit. He made it up. So he's conning people.

What is the con, exactly?

He was trying to start a cult.

 

[norwegen]

I asked you. You pick one.

The one about getting to an invible being through him.

"No one comes to the Father except through me" (Jn 14:6). That one?

Jesus is declaring something. What makes it a tale?

It's bullshit. He made it up. So he's conning people.

What is the con, exactly?

He was trying to start a cult.

By cult, you mean Christianity?

That you would concur that that was what he was trying to start is surprising. An atheist sees not just Christianity's origin, but its very seed.

When presented with scripture, even some Christians see it, too, I think. Yet they dismiss the church as if it's in the way of or parenthetical to something grander.

 

[danielpalos]

According to some biblical historians, such as Bart Ehrman, most scholars believe Jesus did not know that he was launching a new movement, i.e., the church, because that movement started after his death. If that’s the case, did Jesus fail? What was the purpose of his ministry? What was the “good news”?


I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?

he was about social morals for free over capital morals for a market friendly price.

He was about the church. That was his mission. It's what he died for.

Morals not economics.

 

[norwegen]

According to some biblical historians, such as Bart Ehrman, most scholars believe Jesus did not know that he was launching a new movement, i.e., the church, because that movement started after his death. If that’s the case, did Jesus fail? What was the purpose of his ministry? What was the “good news”?


I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?

he was about social morals for free over capital morals for a market friendly price.

He was about the church. That was his mission. It's what he died for.

Morals not economics.

You're very perceptive.

 

[irosie91]

Luke 12:49 comes to mind:

"I've come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already ablaze!"

Indeed, this is the eschatology of the entire New Testament. Jesus would return in judgment. He baptized in fire in AD 70, when the temple burned and the Mosaic Age ended.

Paganism was still the same - no growth.

Christianity's opportunity to bloom arrived in this fire.

you seem to like sophistry

You seem to like to rebut sans any rebuttal.

baptized in fire? <<< that one does not make sense either.
VERY BABYLONIAN. Jesus was out to "end the mosaic age"
.......whatevah that is

You're a Jew, yes?

I don't imagine it does make sense to you.

maybe it made sense to Luke ---the greek freak

 

[norwegen]

Indeed, this is the eschatology of the entire New Testament. Jesus would return in judgment. He baptized in fire in AD 70, when the temple burned and the Mosaic Age ended.

Paganism was still the same - no growth.

Christianity's opportunity to bloom arrived in this fire.

you seem to like sophistry

You seem to like to rebut sans any rebuttal.

baptized in fire? <<< that one does not make sense either.
VERY BABYLONIAN. Jesus was out to "end the mosaic age"
.......whatevah that is

You're a Jew, yes?

I don't imagine it does make sense to you.

maybe it made sense to Luke ---the greek freak

Did he not convert to Judaism?

Besides Luke at any rate, it made sense to a few Jews. Paul proclaimed citizenship in the kingdom for himself and his contemporaries (Col 1:13). The letter to the Hebrews exhorted believers to be grateful for the kingdom they had received (Heb 12:28). And of course John the Revelator declared himself a partner in the kingdom with his brethren (Rv 1:9).

A few Jews in the first century recognized that the kingdom had arrived. These few Jews were part of the church.

 

[Avatar4321]

According to some biblical historians, such as Bart Ehrman, most scholars believe Jesus did not know that he was launching a new movement, i.e., the church, because that movement started after his death. If that’s the case, did Jesus fail? What was the purpose of his ministry? What was the “good news”?


I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?[/QUOTE"]
"Upon this rock I will build my church."

"Upon this rock I will build my church."

Why would some scholars disagree?

Because many are arrogant fools who can’t see what’s in front of them because they want to find and teach something unique and new. Ironically their efforts usually make them sound exactly like everyone else in their profession

 

[irosie91]

[
You're a Jew, yes?

I don't imagine it does make sense to you.

maybe it made sense to Luke ---the greek freak[/QUOTE]
Did he not convert to Judaism? <<<< No---Luke did not
convert to Judaism

Besides Luke at any rate, it made sense to a few Jews. Paul proclaimed citizenship in the kingdom for himself and his contemporaries (Col 1:13). Paul was a greek convert to
Judaism and a very Hellenized jew



The letter to the Hebrews exhorted believers to be grateful for the kingdom they had received (Heb 12:28). Paul


And of course John the Revelator declared himself a partner in the kingdom with his brethren (Rv 1:9). The identity of John is an unknown

A few Jews in the first century recognized that the kingdom had arrived. These few Jews were part of the church.[/QUOTE]
there were many jewish cults at that time

 

[norwegen]

According to some biblical historians, such as Bart Ehrman, most scholars believe Jesus did not know that he was launching a new movement, i.e., the church, because that movement started after his death. If that’s the case, did Jesus fail? What was the purpose of his ministry? What was the “good news”?


I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?[/QUOTE"]
"Upon this rock I will build my church."

"Upon this rock I will build my church."

Why would some scholars disagree?

Because many are arrogant fools who can’t see what’s in front of them because they want to find and teach something unique and new. Ironically their efforts usually make them sound exactly like everyone else in their profession

I'm not so sure. Scholars who disagree that Jesus knew he was starting a movement are like mainstream fundamentalist Christians in that regard. Fundamentalist Christians believe that the church is accidental, or better maybe that it is parenthetical, not Christ's ultimate objective.

 

[norwegen]

[
You're a Jew, yes?

I don't imagine it does make sense to you.

maybe it made sense to Luke ---the greek freak

Did he not convert to Judaism? <<<< No---Luke did not
convert to Judaism

Besides Luke at any rate, it made sense to a few Jews. Paul proclaimed citizenship in the kingdom for himself and his contemporaries (Col 1:13). Paul was a greek convert to
Judaism and a very Hellenized jew



The letter to the Hebrews exhorted believers to be grateful for the kingdom they had received (Heb 12:28). Paul


And of course John the Revelator declared himself a partner in the kingdom with his brethren (Rv 1:9). The identity of John is an unknown

A few Jews in the first century recognized that the kingdom had arrived. These few Jews were part of the church.[/QUOTE]
there were many jewish cults at that time[/QUOTE]


St. Paul was a Pharisee who knew Greek. Nobody really knows for sure who wrote Hebrews or Revelation. I'm not sure how these are relevant.

[T]there were many jewish cults at that time. Yea, okay, maybe that's relevant.

In hindsight, the Jewish cult that mattered was Christianity.

 

[Taz]

According to some biblical historians, such as Bart Ehrman, most scholars believe Jesus did not know that he was launching a new movement, i.e., the church, because that movement started after his death. If that’s the case, did Jesus fail? What was the purpose of his ministry? What was the “good news”?


I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?[/QUOTE"]
"Upon this rock I will build my church."

"Upon this rock I will build my church."

Why would some scholars disagree?

Because many are arrogant fools who can’t see what’s in front of them because they want to find and teach something unique and new. Ironically their efforts usually make them sound exactly like everyone else in their profession

You mean like John Smith?

 

[percysunshine]

Obviously Christ was an environmentalist. A cult is a cult.

 

[irosie91]

[
You're a Jew, yes?

I don't imagine it does make sense to you.

maybe it made sense to Luke ---the greek freak

Did he not convert to Judaism? <<<< No---Luke did not
convert to Judaism

Besides Luke at any rate, it made sense to a few Jews. Paul proclaimed citizenship in the kingdom for himself and his contemporaries (Col 1:13). Paul was a greek convert to
Judaism and a very Hellenized jew



The letter to the Hebrews exhorted believers to be grateful for the kingdom they had received (Heb 12:28). Paul


And of course John the Revelator declared himself a partner in the kingdom with his brethren (Rv 1:9). The identity of John is an unknown

A few Jews in the first century recognized that the kingdom had arrived. These few Jews were part of the church.

there were many jewish cults at that time[/QUOTE]


St. Paul was a Pharisee who knew Greek. Nobody really knows for sure who wrote Hebrews or Revelation. I'm not sure how these are relevant.

[T]there were many jewish cults at that time. Yea, okay, maybe that's relevant.

In hindsight, the Jewish cult that mattered was Christianity.[/QUOTE]


"mattered"? Paul ----according to writings in the NT claimed
to be a Pharisee which actually describes a POV in Judaism----
not an inherited thing.. Pharisee was a kind of sect. Scholars claim he born into a group of Judaized greeks in a very greek city----and had greek ancestry. right---no one knows-----especially the stuff attributed to "john" Jesus was a pharisee

 

[Avatar4321]

According to some biblical historians, such as Bart Ehrman, most scholars believe Jesus did not know that he was launching a new movement, i.e., the church, because that movement started after his death. If that’s the case, did Jesus fail? What was the purpose of his ministry? What was the “good news”?


I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?[/QUOTE"]
"Upon this rock I will build my church."

"Upon this rock I will build my church."

Why would some scholars disagree?

Because many are arrogant fools who can’t see what’s in front of them because they want to find and teach something unique and new. Ironically their efforts usually make them sound exactly like everyone else in their profession

I'm not so sure. Scholars who disagree that Jesus knew he was starting a movement are like mainstream fundamentalist Christians in that regard. Fundamentalist Christians believe that the church is accidental, or better maybe that it is parenthetical, not Christ's ultimate objective.

Christ’s ultimate objective was the cross. But it’s clear He certainly established a Church. He trained His disciples. He organized them. He made the Twelve their leaders. If He didn’t want a Church established He went about not establishing one in a strange way.

And then we have to ignore references like Matthew 16:18. But if we just ignore it as unreliable why should we trust anything found in the Gospel?

 

[tyroneweaver]

Jesus was the original con man.

I doubt it

Moses?

More like Taz

 

[tyroneweaver]

According to some biblical historians, such as Bart Ehrman, most scholars believe Jesus did not know that he was launching a new movement, i.e., the church, because that movement started after his death. If that’s the case, did Jesus fail? What was the purpose of his ministry? What was the “good news”?


I say that Jesus did know what he was bringing to the world, and he quite explicitly says so. What do you say?

The whole setup shows that He knew clearly what's going. What humans don't know are what humans don't know is what human witnessing is.

Matthew 16:17-19
Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

He asked Peter to found the Church. Today's Catholic Church reckons that it is founded by Peter.
Hades is a place all dead human will go. He thus knows that the salvation offered (by the New Covenant) will reach humans in majority through His Church such that humans will not all wind up in Hades.

The Jewish meaning of "binding and loosing" signifies an authentication shift, literally from the Jews to the Catholics (more precisely, God withdrew His earthly authority from the Jews and reassign the Church as His new representative). NT Canon is thus designed and enforced by the Church, however the Jews are still the one keeping the legitimate OT Canon. The keeper and enforcer of Bible Canons are God's earthly representatives. First came the Jews thus they are the keeper of the OT Canon, followed by the Catholics as the keeper of the NT Canon. Now this authentication has been extended to the Protestants and thus they are the only intangible authority but keeping both an authenticated OT Canon (same as the Jews) and an authenticated NT Canon (same as the Jews).

Acts 1:7-8
He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.
But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

To the apostles, they may have taken "ends of the earth" as the whole Roman empire. However literally this becomes a prophecy of today's influence. So it may be in the contrary that the apostles (some of them) may not actually know the final effect of preaching the gospel. However Jesus somehow predicts correctly that the gospel will finally reach the 4 corners of the earth.

Jesus was alive already before being sent to Earth and knew before he went what the deal was...

dang, there is hope for you.

 

[Avatar4321]

Jesus was the original con man.

I doubt it

Moses?

More like Taz

Forgive him. He doesn’t know what he is doing. He doesn’t know anything. And he is proud that he doesn’t.

Don’t waste your time