[ POLL ] Which National Religion?

Post Reply New Topic

Observant Orthodox Jews would view any pagan religion or practices as idolatry,Judaism does not condone any pagan and or occult practice.The good news is that Gehena (hell) isn't eternal and according to the Talmud only lasts about 11 months.So your not in quite as much trouble as you would be in with Christianity and Islam.

...is that 11 months for everyone, or does it increase with how much bacon you've consumed?

OK,so you believe the Catholics are the true Scotsman.

The Catholic church goes back 1700 years not 2000 and was established by Constantine in 320ce,where Constantine added a lot of Grecco-Roman pagan practices to attract pagan converts.
Christmas on the winter solstice
Easter on the spring solstice
Sunday worship to attract followers of the Roman sun god whom was worshiped on sundays
Use of statues and graven images prohibited by the 2nd of the 10 statements found in Exodus to attract the pagan element.
Worship of the mother Mary which is obvious idolatry and Mary wasn't really the mother of Jesus because according to Christianity,Jesus is an uncreated divine being born of a virgin.

The first official Christian church was the Armenian church established in 308ce but I'm sure Christianity was popular in Armenia for a 100 years or so before the Armenian King made the Church official.Armenia is not far from where Paul did his mission work in Asia Minor so it's no surprise that Christianity was popular there first.The Armenian church is now part of the Oriental Orthodox umbrella which split with the Catholic church in 451ce.But they were the first gentile Christian church.

The first Christians were Torah following Jews for Jesus and wasn't until Paul said that gentiles need not follow the Torah to be legit followers of Jesus that Christianity became something other than a bizarre Jewish cult.Once the gentiles who Paul converted stopped following Torah then the Jews followed suit and Christianity was it's own religion.

In the era of Paul the Gospels had not been written yet,they didn't come until about 35 years after Paul's death and the book of John not until as late as 110ce.

The earliest Christians practices are unknown in history,110ce and 308ce are a void in Christian history.I see no evidence that it looked the Catholic church.

The "born of a virgin" part is also part mistranslation, part pagan import.

Gentiles don't need to follow the 613 Mitzvah of the Torah,they only need to follow the 7 Noachide laws.So gentiles may eat pork all day if they want and be rightious.

The only dietary law in the Noachide laws is:Don't eat flesh torn from a live animal.
Today we have freezers to keep meat fresh and so there is no need cut the leg off of a live cow or lamb in order to save the meat from going bad.

The modern meaning of this Noachide law is to not be cruel to animals.

Also is Jesus was born of a virgin and his parents don't share his DNA,then Jesus would then have no blood relation to King David,which the Bible states that Jesus was from the line of David.

Wrong.  Half of His DNA came from His mother, the other half from His Father.

The New Testament provides two accounts of the genealogy of Jesus, one in the Gospel of Matthew and another in the Gospel of Luke.  Matthew starts with Abraham, while Luke begins with Adam.  Luke's account follows the lineage of Mary, and shows how Jesus and King David are related.

Read your Bible -- that's what it's there for.

If one is of virgin birth than they can't possibly share there parents DNA.

So they can't then share there parents genealogy.The New Testament genealogy is not relevant,it's written to support itself.The genealogy is of no value if there is no DNA between Jesus and his parents.

This argument and theory is from a credited Israeli Rabbi and not made up by me.Rabbi Tovia Singer,he is found on youtube,I don't remember the exact video he gave this theory.

The Rabbi is not saying Jesus is divine and born of a virgin,he is just saying that there is a contradiction in the New Testament.And that there is contradiction in the fact of saying Jesus is of the house of David in one statement,then saying Jesus is un-created and divine and of virgin birth in another statement.If Jesus didn't come from sex between parents he can't have his parents genes and can't be from the house of David if he shares no DNA with Mary Joseph.

Last edited by vermontsavant on 09 Sep 2020, 8:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Spirituality.

Wrong, again! Just what do you think "Virgin Birth" really means?  It means only that the mother has conceived and given birth without ever having had sex or having been inseminated by other means.  The child will still share at least half of its DNA with its mother, and if the child is female, it is essentially a clone of the mother; but if the child is male, then that little "y" chromosome was either a mutation, or it was induced by an external agent.

That is science fact.

But that makes Jesus a created being like JW's and Arians believed which contradicts the trinity.

Who cares what JWs and Arians believe?

Again, read your Bible!

Don't own the New Testament,I study Rabbi's on youtube.I'm giving you there arguments,I don't read New Testament.

Do you expect to have a rational discussion on Christianity when you seem to have little knowledge of what you are talking about?  Do you expect to have a rational discussion on science when you seem to know little about the subject?

Back then that didnt matter. They didnt know from DNA. If you were born to a woman in David's line then...you were of David's line. Even today- if the Holy Ghost (for some odd reason) decided to impregnate your mom and conceive you without her husband's semen, you would still inherit your mom and dad's property when you grew up and they passed away. Legally you would still be in their line of inheritance.

"I'm the 'Virgin' Mary, that's my story and I'm sticking to it!"