Is this a fair representative of Christianity?

[TrinityPower]

Jeremiah, Rosie and Koshergirl are about as useful as the baseball player who had 4 balls and couldn't run to the base

 

[irosie91]

david did not dance on his balcony----he danced right out there in the opened space----
in the vicinity of the ark------. The dancing was in Jerusalem. His wife Michal watched from the window. It's ok---most
Christians never read the bible. Penelope was not permitted to do so. Here is
another trivia point-----who was Michal?

Michal was the daughter of Saul and David's wife. And you are correct, Rosie. David did not dance on his balcony!

I should do trivia questions on my Elijah thread ( God willing I will post that thread tomorrow) there are a few questions that I am pretty sure most folks here would not have an answer to! Stay tuned!

The point of the post wasn't where he danced but the three of you are too Pharastic to realize it and have made it all about your own agenda which is still proving you are a sad representation of Christianity

if you meant PHARISAIC-----you can take that Nazi shit comment and shove it up your Nazi ass

 

[BluePhantom]

In the time that the st pearls before swine.." saying was used ----the PEARLS were
the wisdom of the Tanach and Midrash and Talmud

The Talmud didn't come around until a good 150 years or so after Matthew was written.

blue----if the above post is a sample of that which you "know"-----I am sorry for
you------you don't know much......... The development of the Talmud took place
over many many decades ---in two places----BABYLON and Israel/judea------most of it l before Matthew was written. You seem
to be getting your information from sources similar to the ones Penelope uses.
One of the most famous talmudists---Hillel----died either just after or just before
Jesus is thought to have been born. Jesus quotes Hillel----lots-------but then again--
everyone did back then

There were certain things written before, yes, (mostly found in the Mishnah) but the Talmud itself was not complied until the 3rd Century and most of the writings didn't come until well after that

wrong----most of the writings PRECEDED the compilation----in fact----preceded the "common era". The compilation was just that -----a compilation of
prior writings. Lots of the stuff was so well known-----having been batted around in both Israel/Judea and Babylon in the yeshivas there-----that the compilation of the Talmud and Mishnah was just a matter of------writing stuff already known by rote. It was not being "authored"

WRONG! The Talmud consists primarily of two parts: Mishna and Gemara. Mishnah (the oral law or oral tradition) was written over the course of centuries but was not compiled and published until 200 CE. The Gemara, which is essentially arguments and commentaries on Mishnah as well as some other stuff and makes up a far greater portion of the Talmud, were reactions to the publication of the Mishnah in the 3rd century CE. Gemara wasn't compiled and published as part of the Talmud for about 300 more years in the early 6th century CE.

You are essentially making an argument akin to 'Paul quoted the New Testament'. The New Testament didn't even exist then. It's the same thing. Yeah there were opinions floating around and oral law but none of it was organized and compiled until the 3rd century and the rest are arguments about that compilation for the most part that occurred centuries later.

The History of the Talmud - What is the Talmud What is Gemora What is the Oral Tradition Why Learn Torah

The Oral Law -Talmud Mishna Jewish Virtual Library

Gemara Talmud

.

 

[irosie91]

Jeremiah, Rosie and Koshergirl are about as useful as the baseball player who had 4 balls and couldn't run to the base

for whom do you speak-----the POPE?

 

[TrinityPower]

Have any more cards in your deck? When an argument can't be defended call someone a Nazi or racist. Can't stay on topic, take your 4 balls and head home

 

[irosie91]

In the time that the st pearls before swine.." saying was used ----the PEARLS were
the wisdom of the Tanach and Midrash and Talmud

The Talmud didn't come around until a good 150 years or so after Matthew was written.

blue----if the above post is a sample of that which you "know"-----I am sorry for
you------you don't know much......... The development of the Talmud took place
over many many decades ---in two places----BABYLON and Israel/judea------most of it l before Matthew was written. You seem
to be getting your information from sources similar to the ones Penelope uses.
One of the most famous talmudists---Hillel----died either just after or just before
Jesus is thought to have been born. Jesus quotes Hillel----lots-------but then again--
everyone did back then

There were certain things written before, yes, (mostly found in the Mishnah) but the Talmud itself was not complied until the 3rd Century and most of the writings didn't come until well after that

wrong----most of the writings PRECEDED the compilation----in fact----preceded the "common era". The compilation was just that -----a compilation of
prior writings. Lots of the stuff was so well known-----having been batted around in both Israel/Judea and Babylon in the yeshivas there-----that the compilation of the Talmud and Mishnah was just a matter of------writing stuff already known by rote. It was not being "authored"

WRONG! The Talmud consists primarily of two parts: Mishna and Gemara. Mishnah (the oral law or oral tradition) was written over the course of centuries but was not compiled and published until 200 CE. The Gemara, which is essentially arguments and commentaries on Mishnah as well as some other stuff and makes up a far greater portion of the Talmud, were reactions to the publication of the Mishnah in the 3rd century CE. Gemara wasn't compiled and published as part of the Talmud for about 300 more years in the early 6th century CE.

You are essentially making an argument akin to 'Paul quoted the New Testament'. The New Testament didn't even exist then. It's the same thing. Yeah there were opinions floating around and oral law but none of it was organized and compiled until the 3rd century and the rest are arguments about that compilation for the most part that occurred centuries later.

The History of the Talmud - What is the Talmud What is Gemora What is the Oral Tradition Why Learn Torah

The Oral Law -Talmud Mishna Jewish Virtual Library

Gemara Talmud

.

your reconstruction is wrong----not my comment-----and your statement that the gemara is ----public reaction to the publication of the Mishnah is actually hilarious

 

[TrinityPower]

Jeremiah, Rosie and Koshergirl are about as useful as the baseball player who had 4 balls and couldn't run to the base

for whom do you speak-----the POPE?

I guess I can see if he has time to give you a personal call

 

[irosie91]

compilation of the Talmud-------is just that ----compilation----not the authorship of its components. Jesus quoted the TALMUDIST Hillel -----after Hillel was already DEAD Hillel had been a Talmudist both in Babylon and in Jerusalem----he died in Jerusalem. His stuff was POPULARLY quoted long before that final compilation that you seem to believe was ----authorship of the books

 

[BluePhantom]

Where do you get yours besides out of your narrow minded brain? You went off on your own little power trip and self parade of superiority and totally disregarded the point of the post I made because apparently you could not take the message and apply it so you picked a piece of it and are doing your best to discredit the point and make this a conversaation about your

We aren't supposed to cast pearls before swine.

I have heard people say that a lot. I have seen it in the Bible many times.

What exactly does it mean when someone says, "Don't cast your pearls before swine." ?

it was a very much used and popular saying 2000 years ago amongst Pharisees. I believe that it shows up in the Talmud. ----------It was one of the reasons that the
Romans did not like Pharisees and liked to crucify them-----mostly because they did
not like romans

Look if you don't know then say hey I don't know but quit spouting false things. You didn't answer the question. You know, maybe you should look it up yourself. Just because you can quote a passage doesn't mean you know what it means

Exactly....the Romans didn't give two shits about the Pharisees. Truth be told, the Romans had a great respect for the Jews and Jewish beliefs. They just didn't take any shit so when there was an uprising or someone got uppity they did the Roman thing and made an example of them. The Jews got several benefits from the Romans that most conquered nations did not receive such as not having to provide soldiers for the military, not having to worship Roman state gods, not having graven images of the Emperor in Palestine or on Judean coinage. etc. The Romans didn't hate the Pharisee at all. They left them alone so long as they paid their taxes and didn't threaten a rebellion. Now the zealots....ok well...that's a bit different.

you recited the Nazi version of history-------I am impressed In fact you virtually parrot the muslim version of their conquests------people were HONORED to be raped and pillaged by muslims. The romans despised the Pharisees------as to the great honor of being invaded and ruled by romans-----the very worst that
you nazis have with which to deal is that jews were LITERATE and have more written history . Jews especially loved those crucifixtions------which to your women were TITILATTING. Now you can tell me
how happily jews lived in shariah societies-----hubby is right here---he was born in a shariah shit hole. From where do you get your history lessons-----
your catechism nun or the local mosque? See----I know your stuff-----I read it as a child having lived in a Nazi enclave in the USA-----then I got the corollary muslim version ----the stuff written by Nazi war criminals----mostly in Syria and egypt

I gave the version of history accepted by the vast majority of scholarship. You are giving the version of history that is line with Jeremiah's 'Superman represents the devil' bullshit. BTW...more Jews in the first century were FAR from literate. Literacy is estimated to be somewhere between 3%-5% depending on where you lived in 1st century Palestine. Literacy came from an education...most Jews were peasants under Roman rule. They didn't have the luxury of getting an education. Educations were for the rich. And I never said Jews loved being under Roman rule. What I said was that the Romans didn't have a problem with the Jews unless they did something that threatened the state. The zealots were militaristic and focused upon creating a rebellion. The Pharisees were concerned with keeping The Law. What did the Romans care about keeping The Law? They didn't give two shits about The Law. If a Jew wanted to keep The Law...fine...keep the fucking Law. Just make sure you pay your taxes and don't start shit.

 

[TrinityPower]

Jeremiah, Rosie and Koshergirl are about as useful as the baseball player who had 4 balls and couldn't run to the base

for whom do you speak-----the POPE?

See that would be an example of casting pearls before swine. Make a great witty joke and they don't understand it. Whoever asked for the meaning of that phrase there you go.

 

[BluePhantom]

compilation of the Talmud-------is just that ----compilation----not the authorship of its components. Jesus quoted the TALMUDIST Hillel -----after Hillel was already DEAD Hillel had been a Talmudist both in Babylon and in Jerusalem----he died in Jerusalem. His stuff was POPULARLY quoted long before that final compilation that you seem to believe was ----authorship of the books

Here let me do something you are so fond of doing....AS ORAL TRADITION AND ORAL LAW. See what I did there? They existed as oral tradition. Then they were compiled...then they were edited....and then the rest of it was written. To say that the author of Matthew was referring to the Talmud is absolutely ridiculous. IT DIDN'T EXIST when Matthew was written. Many of the opinions that eventually became the Mishnah may have existed but the Talmud didn't exist. Jesus Christ on His cross.

 

[BluePhantom]

Where do you get yours besides out of your narrow minded brain? You went off on your own little power trip and self parade of superiority and totally disregarded the point of the post I made because apparently you could not take the message and apply it so you picked a piece of it and are doing your best to discredit the point and make this a conversaation about your

We aren't supposed to cast pearls before swine.

I have heard people say that a lot. I have seen it in the Bible many times.

What exactly does it mean when someone says, "Don't cast your pearls before swine." ?

it was a very much used and popular saying 2000 years ago amongst Pharisees. I believe that it shows up in the Talmud. ----------It was one of the reasons that the
Romans did not like Pharisees and liked to crucify them-----mostly because they did
not like romans

Look if you don't know then say hey I don't know but quit spouting false things. You didn't answer the question. You know, maybe you should look it up yourself. Just because you can quote a passage doesn't mean you know what it means

Exactly....the Romans didn't give two shits about the Pharisees. Truth be told, the Romans had a great respect for the Jews and Jewish beliefs. They just didn't take any shit so when there was an uprising or someone got uppity they did the Roman thing and made an example of them. The Jews got several benefits from the Romans that most conquered nations did not receive such as not having to provide soldiers for the military, not having to worship Roman state gods, not having graven images of the Emperor in Palestine or on Judean coinage. etc. The Romans didn't hate the Pharisee at all. They left them alone so long as they paid their taxes and didn't threaten a rebellion. Now the zealots....ok well...that's a bit different.

you recited the Nazi version of history-------I am impressed In fact you virtually parrot the muslim version of their conquests------people were HONORED to be raped and pillaged by muslims. The romans despised the Pharisees------as to the great honor of being invaded and ruled by romans-----the very worst that
you nazis have with which to deal is that jews were LITERATE and have more written history . Jews especially loved those crucifixtions------which to your women were TITILATTING. Now you can tell me
how happily jews lived in shariah societies-----hubby is right here---he was born in a shariah shit hole. From where do you get your history lessons-----
your catechism nun or the local mosque? See----I know your stuff-----I read it as a child having lived in a Nazi enclave in the USA-----then I got the corollary muslim version ----the stuff written by Nazi war criminals----mostly in Syria and egypt

BTW...remember how we have been blasting Koshergrl for going ape shit and attacking people when it's made very clear that she has no idea what she is talking about? You suggestion that I am a Nazi....boy that seems eerily similar doesn't it?

 

[BluePhantom]

Have any more cards in your deck? When an argument can't be defended call someone a Nazi or racist. Can't stay on topic, take your 4 balls and head home

Seriously....when Koshergrl gets spanked she throws a tantrum because she can't keep up with the debate and screams that they are going to hell. I guess iRosie claims you are a nazi.

 

[TrinityPower]

Have any more cards in your deck? When an argument can't be defended call someone a Nazi or racist. Can't stay on topic, take your 4 balls and head home

Seriously....when Koshergrl gets spanked she throws a tantrum because she can't keep up with the debate and screams that they are going to hell. I guess iRosie claims you are a nazi.

Yeah a Nazi who speaks for the Pope to boot. I gave him her number. He is going to call her after he gets out of the can

 

[BluePhantom]

The Talmud didn't come around until a good 150 years or so after Matthew was written.

blue----if the above post is a sample of that which you "know"-----I am sorry for
you------you don't know much......... The development of the Talmud took place
over many many decades ---in two places----BABYLON and Israel/judea------most of it l before Matthew was written. You seem
to be getting your information from sources similar to the ones Penelope uses.
One of the most famous talmudists---Hillel----died either just after or just before
Jesus is thought to have been born. Jesus quotes Hillel----lots-------but then again--
everyone did back then

There were certain things written before, yes, (mostly found in the Mishnah) but the Talmud itself was not complied until the 3rd Century and most of the writings didn't come until well after that

wrong----most of the writings PRECEDED the compilation----in fact----preceded the "common era". The compilation was just that -----a compilation of
prior writings. Lots of the stuff was so well known-----having been batted around in both Israel/Judea and Babylon in the yeshivas there-----that the compilation of the Talmud and Mishnah was just a matter of------writing stuff already known by rote. It was not being "authored"

WRONG! The Talmud consists primarily of two parts: Mishna and Gemara. Mishnah (the oral law or oral tradition) was written over the course of centuries but was not compiled and published until 200 CE. The Gemara, which is essentially arguments and commentaries on Mishnah as well as some other stuff and makes up a far greater portion of the Talmud, were reactions to the publication of the Mishnah in the 3rd century CE. Gemara wasn't compiled and published as part of the Talmud for about 300 more years in the early 6th century CE.

You are essentially making an argument akin to 'Paul quoted the New Testament'. The New Testament didn't even exist then. It's the same thing. Yeah there were opinions floating around and oral law but none of it was organized and compiled until the 3rd century and the rest are arguments about that compilation for the most part that occurred centuries later.

The History of the Talmud - What is the Talmud What is Gemora What is the Oral Tradition Why Learn Torah

The Oral Law -Talmud Mishna Jewish Virtual Library

Gemara Talmud

.

your reconstruction is wrong----not my comment-----and your statement that the gemara is ----public reaction to the publication of the Mishnah is actually hilarious

No I didn't say it was public reaction. I never said who was doing the reaction...actually it was other rabbis arguing among themselves or giving commentary and analysis. I have provided three references...i can provide more if you would like. Tons of them in fact. All you have offered is your insistence that I am wrong

WAIT WAIT...let me beat you to the punch...those were nazi sources right?

 

[TrinityPower]

blue----if the above post is a sample of that which you "know"-----I am sorry for
you------you don't know much......... The development of the Talmud took place
over many many decades ---in two places----BABYLON and Israel/judea------most of it l before Matthew was written. You seem
to be getting your information from sources similar to the ones Penelope uses.
One of the most famous talmudists---Hillel----died either just after or just before
Jesus is thought to have been born. Jesus quotes Hillel----lots-------but then again--
everyone did back then

There were certain things written before, yes, (mostly found in the Mishnah) but the Talmud itself was not complied until the 3rd Century and most of the writings didn't come until well after that

wrong----most of the writings PRECEDED the compilation----in fact----preceded the "common era". The compilation was just that -----a compilation of
prior writings. Lots of the stuff was so well known-----having been batted around in both Israel/Judea and Babylon in the yeshivas there-----that the compilation of the Talmud and Mishnah was just a matter of------writing stuff already known by rote. It was not being "authored"

WRONG! The Talmud consists primarily of two parts: Mishna and Gemara. Mishnah (the oral law or oral tradition) was written over the course of centuries but was not compiled and published until 200 CE. The Gemara, which is essentially arguments and commentaries on Mishnah as well as some other stuff and makes up a far greater portion of the Talmud, were reactions to the publication of the Mishnah in the 3rd century CE. Gemara wasn't compiled and published as part of the Talmud for about 300 more years in the early 6th century CE.

You are essentially making an argument akin to 'Paul quoted the New Testament'. The New Testament didn't even exist then. It's the same thing. Yeah there were opinions floating around and oral law but none of it was organized and compiled until the 3rd century and the rest are arguments about that compilation for the most part that occurred centuries later.

The History of the Talmud - What is the Talmud What is Gemora What is the Oral Tradition Why Learn Torah

The Oral Law -Talmud Mishna Jewish Virtual Library

Gemara Talmud

.

your reconstruction is wrong----not my comment-----and your statement that the gemara is ----public reaction to the publication of the Mishnah is actually hilarious

No I didn't say it was public reaction. I never said who was doing the reaction...actually it was other rabbis arguing among themselves or giving commentary and analysis. I have provided three references...i can provide more if you would like. Tons of them in fact. All you have offered is your insistence that I am wrong

WAIT WAIT...let me beat you to the punch...those were nazi sources right?

shhh (looking around for spies)...rumor has it you gave the devil the reach around while Hitler watched and that's how you obtain information

 

[aris2chat]

david did not dance on his balcony----he danced right out there in the opened space----
in the vicinity of the ark------. The dancing was in Jerusalem. His wife Michal watched from the window. It's ok---most
Christians never read the bible. Penelope was not permitted to do so. Here is
another trivia point-----who was Michal?

There is a contemporary Christian song that says, "I will dance like David danced ." It cracks me up every time because David danced naked.

No he had on a linen priestly robe that was probably very thin like cheese cloth.

the story really is-----for those of us not Christian who did read the book-----He danced and the skirt of whatever he wore flew around and MICHAL complained that his
dancing like that in the presence of the girls (flirt that he was) was not nice and
his "thighs" got exposed. There is no way to say in Hebrew----YOUR WHOLE ASS WAS STICKING OUT. She said "bad king----you looked like a jerk" < loose translation. Probably nothing was actually sticking out------Michal was just being
a drag------after all------I think by then he had gone and married ABIGAIL-----damn
bigamist. Are we playing the "bible quiz game"??

Most men till the tenth century wore skirts or dresses. Most people around the world did till this century.

 

[TrinityPower]

yes and think about the region these things took place. Desert, heat, lose clothing etc. Things were made to cover but be light

 

[BluePhantom]

There were certain things written before, yes, (mostly found in the Mishnah) but the Talmud itself was not complied until the 3rd Century and most of the writings didn't come until well after that

wrong----most of the writings PRECEDED the compilation----in fact----preceded the "common era". The compilation was just that -----a compilation of
prior writings. Lots of the stuff was so well known-----having been batted around in both Israel/Judea and Babylon in the yeshivas there-----that the compilation of the Talmud and Mishnah was just a matter of------writing stuff already known by rote. It was not being "authored"

WRONG! The Talmud consists primarily of two parts: Mishna and Gemara. Mishnah (the oral law or oral tradition) was written over the course of centuries but was not compiled and published until 200 CE. The Gemara, which is essentially arguments and commentaries on Mishnah as well as some other stuff and makes up a far greater portion of the Talmud, were reactions to the publication of the Mishnah in the 3rd century CE. Gemara wasn't compiled and published as part of the Talmud for about 300 more years in the early 6th century CE.

You are essentially making an argument akin to 'Paul quoted the New Testament'. The New Testament didn't even exist then. It's the same thing. Yeah there were opinions floating around and oral law but none of it was organized and compiled until the 3rd century and the rest are arguments about that compilation for the most part that occurred centuries later.

The History of the Talmud - What is the Talmud What is Gemora What is the Oral Tradition Why Learn Torah

The Oral Law -Talmud Mishna Jewish Virtual Library

Gemara Talmud

.

your reconstruction is wrong----not my comment-----and your statement that the gemara is ----public reaction to the publication of the Mishnah is actually hilarious

No I didn't say it was public reaction. I never said who was doing the reaction...actually it was other rabbis arguing among themselves or giving commentary and analysis. I have provided three references...i can provide more if you would like. Tons of them in fact. All you have offered is your insistence that I am wrong

WAIT WAIT...let me beat you to the punch...those were nazi sources right?

shhh (looking around for spies)...rumor has it you gave the devil the reach around while Hitler watched and that's how you obtain information

Actually it gave me a great idea. I am going to go play Axis & Allies with my daughter so I guess for the next few hours at least I will indeed be a nazi. I remain undefeated since I started playing it at age 13 or so, but her only chance of beating me is if I play the Axis side.

As Donnie and Marie always said..."goodnight everybody"

 

[Yarddog]

Do you see the word "church" in here:

"Full Definition of SACRAMENT
1
a : a Christian rite (as baptism or the Eucharist) that is believed to have been ordained by Christ and that is held to be a means of divine grace or to be a sign or symbol of a spiritual reality
b : a religious rite or observance comparable to a Christian sacrament "

?

Nope. You don't. Now go sit down, you piece of shit. You need to look up words before you presume to tell people what they mean.

You people do need to die.

Sacrament Definition of sacrament by Merriam-Webster

I dont think so, if you read the New testament in full context you can see Jesus gives Outward religious acts much less regard than what is in a person's heart, and that is the real transformation that is supposed to take place. Sacraments and such I think are ways for the christian community to come together as a group, perhaps?

But when it comes to the definition of a Christian , it would be someone who believes that in some way, Christ is the key of bridging this physical world to a better understanding of God. As this is supposed to be more of an internal thing, I realy think this is for each person to figure out . hhmmm between them and god.
Simply performing a sacrament or reciting some verses without anything else would hardly be a definition.

However Christ also was adamant about rejecting sin and taking a stand, even to death, before embracing sin or recanting your faith. Sacraments in and of themselves don't bring salvation. Their power lies in their public nature. Marriage to Christians is a public declaration of a pact before God, and to participate in a ceremony that makes a mockery of it is an affront to God and one of the things we feel most strong about. Christians are supposed to stand apart. They are expected by God to abstain from certain worldly traditions. Even if it brings persecution and death. It's one thing to approach potential converts on their own turf..it's another to participate in sacrilege yourself just to fit in.

That may all be true, but what is a simple definition of a Christian ? sometimes you can miss the forest because of the trees as well. In standing apart a person can also stand apart for the wrong reasons if they are not careful. Im not really disagreeing with you though