Creation vs. Evolution

[Thalassamania]

... So it was The Romans in a way trying to force their religion on the Jews, and Jews tend to fight back.

Some say that is was really the Jew's intolerance toward the Roman's rather laissez faire attitude toward what god(s) to worship. Sort of like in the USA where we hold the myth that the Pilgrims (Puritians) fled to American for religious freedom. If the truth be known they came to America becase no one in Europe could long tollerate the Puritains' incrediable intollerance toward eveyone that did not toe the Puritan line.

 

[peterbj7]

Or it was simply religion being used as an excuse for politics, which IMO is what it's really about.

And Thalassamania, it takes a brave American to admit what I have always thought was the case!!

 

[ekremer]

That could be Thal, I admit I am no expert in the field, but for now I will stick with what I can find.

Jewish-Roman War Cont. | Progressive U

The Romans intentionally disrepecting the Jewish Religion and attempting to violate it.
But That is also not really here or there in the discussion of how just because Christians have large numbers means they are automatically correct, as Nereas was trying to point out earlier.

And I think this will be my last post on the subject here, This discussion really should be for another thread, and probably another forum.

 

[peterbj7]

because Christians have large numbers means they are automatically correct, as Nereas was trying to point out earlier

They are numerous now, but they were a tiny minority sect at the times we're talking about. It was only when the Roman Emperor (I forget who) decided to adopt the new religion that it really took off.

 

[nereas]

They are numerous now, but they were a tiny minority sect at the times we're talking about. It was only when the Roman Emperor (I forget who) decided to adopt the new religion that it really took off.

Constantine the Great. As in Constantinople.

And by the way, christianity had already grown immensely in ancient Greece and Rome. Why else would he have adopted it? Besides his vision of a shining cross?

 

[nereas]

Some say that is was really the Jew's intolerance toward the Roman's rather laissez faire attitude toward what god(s) to worship. Sort of like in the USA where we hold the myth that the Pilgrims (Puritians) fled to American for religious freedom. If the truth be known they came to America becase no one in Europe could long tollerate the Puritains' incrediable intollerance toward eveyone that did not toe the Puritan line.

Exactly!

The Romans were a just people trying to govern an immense and unjust Mediterranean world.

They certainly could not permit rebellion and insurrection in the rat hole that was called Judaea, at the time. No matter what the excuse or pretense.

 

[nereas]

I had to do some reaserch into why you posted about this LOL. Apparently Some Christians beleive this attack was predicted by Jesus in the book of Daniel. And you would like me to beleive the Temple was destroyed because Jews don't beleive in Jesus.
But it doesn't make that beleif correct, the truth is the Romans felt the need to test the jews by trying to push their multi-diety religion on the the people of Israel.
They decided to up hold the tenents of the 10 commands and beleive there is 1 god and worshiping another god is ripe for punishment.

BTW from Wikipedia:
First Jewish-Roman War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The revolt began in 66 in Caesarea, provoked by Greeks sacrificing birds in front of a local synagogue.[2] The Greek-speaking Roman garrison did not intercede. In an act of defiance, the son of Kohen Gadol (High priest) Eliezar ben Hanania ceased prayers and sacrifices for the Roman Emperor at the Temple and subsequently led a successful attack on the Roman garrison stationed in Jerusalem. The pro-Roman king Agrippa II and his sister Berenice fled Jerusalem to Galilee, where later they gave themselves up to the Romans. Cestius Gallus, the legate of Syria, brought reinforcements to restore order, but was soundly defeated at the Battle of Beth Horon. While retreating, Legio XII Fulminata even lost its aquila.

So it was The Romans in a way trying to force their religion on the Jews, and Jews tend to fight back.

I take it, then, that you did find HELAL in the Hebrew Biblical scriptures, then?

Even though the Jewish Faith does not "believe" in a Lucifer/Helal/Satan/Legion fallen archangel?

And now you want to change the subject and argue about something else?

So I have to wonder, then, if you stopped believing in me, nereas, even though you see a photo of me in my twin tanks above, does that then mean that I cease to exist?

Or would it rather mean that you have your head in the sand, and your belief is false?

These are tricky questions of philosophy, regarding does something cease to exist simply if you refuse to believe it?

Science would say that something exists or does not exist, irrespective of what anyone believes, and determining what is so depends on the scientific method of experimentation of the physical universe.

And religion would say that truth is truth, and those who do not believe it are infidels.

And as east is east, and west is west, science and religion will never meet.

 

[peterbj7]

science and religion will never meet

There are many world-renowned scientists who would disagree with that.

In any case, given that "science" is merely the operation of the human brain which was created by God, isn't that a rather remarkable thing to say?

 

[ekremer]

I take it, then, that you did find HELAL in the Hebrew Biblical scriptures, then?

Even though the Jewish Faith does not "believe" in a Lucifer/Helal/Satan/Legion fallen archangel?

And now you want to change the subject and argue about something else?

So I have to wonder, then, if you stopped believing in me, nereas, even though you see a photo of me in my twin tanks above, does that then mean that I cease to exist?

I know I promised not to post anymore, but come on.

I explained this before, and I will explain it one last time, if you don't understand it now you never will and any future correspondence would obviously be a waste of my breath.

Here is 14:1-12 (12 being the line you refrence)
BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Isaiah 14:1-12; Helel by the way gets interpereted into "morning star"
Which reads (and I apologize but apparently Nareas has no clue how to follow a link.

Isaiah 14

1 The LORD will have compassion on Jacob;
once again he will choose Israel
and will settle them in their own land.
Aliens will join them
and unite with the house of Jacob.

2 Nations will take them
and bring them to their own place.
And the house of Israel will possess the nations
as menservants and maidservants in the LORD's land.
They will make captives of their captors
and rule over their oppressors.

3 On the day the LORD gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage, 4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:
How the oppressor has come to an end!
How his fury [a] has ended!

5 The LORD has broken the rod of the wicked,
the scepter of the rulers,

6 which in anger struck down peoples
with unceasing blows,
and in fury subdued nations
with relentless aggression.

7 All the lands are at rest and at peace;
they break into singing.

8 Even the pine trees and the cedars of Lebanon
exult over you and say,
"Now that you have been laid low,
no woodsman comes to cut us down."

9 The grave below is all astir
to meet you at your coming;
it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you—
all those who were leaders in the world;
it makes them rise from their thrones—
all those who were kings over the nations.

10 They will all respond,
they will say to you,
"You also have become weak, as we are;
you have become like us."

11 All your pomp has been brought down to the grave,
along with the noise of your harps;
maggots are spread out beneath you
and worms cover you.

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

From verse 4 onward it is easy to see we are refering to the King of Babylon, and the tone is very sarcastic. (also chapter 13 reinforces this b/c it also refers to Babylon)

verse 8 says:

8 Even the pine trees and the cedars of Lebanon
exult over you and say,
"Now that you have been laid low,
no woodsman comes to cut us down."

At this point we now see that You refers to the ruler of Babylon.

If we follow that down to section 12, we realize "you" also refers to the King of Babylon. It is referring to how kings believe they are gods or gods on earth. That is the Jewish interpretation, and it makes sense to me. If you do not believe it and believe it refers to a devil that is fine for you. Though do not DARE to even hint that its also how the Jewish faith interprets that section. Do not even dare to tell Jews what there religion is. Or I will go ahead and tell you how its impossible for Jesus to be the messiah based on my religion.

 

[nereas]

I know I promised not to post anymore, but come on...

If we follow that down to section 12, we realize "you" also refers to the King of Babylon. It is referring to how kings believe they are gods or gods on earth. That is the Jewish interpretation, and it makes sense to me. If you do not believe it and believe it refers to a devil that is fine for you. Though do not DARE to even hint that its also how the Jewish faith interprets that section. Do not even dare to tell Jews what there religion is. Or I will go ahead and tell you how its impossible for Jesus to be the messiah based on my religion.

You should google Lucifer, and that will give you more to go on, such as the book (scroll) of Ezekiel the prophet.

I am amazed that you don't know your own scriptures.

And that you are totally illiterate in Hebrew, and are giving us KJV english translations.

I am not interested in your opinions about Jesus. And if you keep making this a jewish vs Jesus thing, the MOD squad will ultimately close this thread.

Sort of like the Romans "closed" Jerusalem. Only faster, as it were.