[duffyd]

Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven residing in Jerusalem. 6 When this sound occurred, a crowd gathered and was in confusion, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7 Completely baffled, they said, “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that each one of us hears them in our own native language? 9 Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and the province of Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11 both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own languages about the great deeds God has done!” 12 All were astounded and greatly confused, saying to one another, “What does this mean?”

Pete explains it to them and "Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day." 3,000 Jewish visitors from all over the world became Christians that very day.

[duffyd]

If it was not written originally by Jews and not in Greek, why do you give any credibility to it?

Too many negatives.
The credibility of a text is partly inherent (could such events have occurred?) and partly corroborative (is there independent evidence?). Doesn't matter what language it was written in, or by whom.

Eusebius [the author of the Codex Vaticanus] was baptized and ordained at Caesarea, where he was taught by the learned presbyter Pamphilus, to whom he was bound by ties of respect and affection and from whom he derived the name “Eusebius Pamphili” (the son or servant of Pamphilus). Pamphilus came to be persecuted by the Romans for his beliefs and died in martyrdom in 310.

A Christian, not a Jew.

He was called the author of that body of work, not the original documents.

[Bored chemist]

became Christians that very day.

That's an interesting definition of "Christian".

[duffyd]

There are only a handful, approx 45 manuscripts that support the text that underlines the modern versions and this text is itself primarily based on just 2, Codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus.

Both written in Greek. By Jews? I think not. Our holy texts are written in Hebrew.

Most scholars agree that the writers of the New Testament were Jewish (with the possible exception of Luke). "Most of the writers of the various parts were Jews, and the writings were designed for Jewish readers who had embraced the Christian faith. The authors drew more or less from contemporary Jewish ideas, ethics, legends, parables and sayings."

The New Testament writers were not rebellious radicals bent on destroying Judaism. They worshiped regularly in the Temple. They were well versed in the Jewish Scriptures as demonstrated by their numerous references to the prophecies and practices of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Paul the Apostle, also known as Saul of Tarsus
The most prolific New Testament writer, Paul, wrote almost half of the 27 New Testament books. His Jewish background is indisputable. He was a son of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin, and a Pharisee. The Jewish scholar Professor Samuel Sandmel of Hebrew Union College observes that Paul the Jew "was at home in the Bible and in the practice of expounding it; he shared the group-feeling of Jews, and he was, from his own standpoint, unreservedly loyal to Judaism."

Paul boasted that prior to becoming a believer in Yeshua (Jesus), he was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of his own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of his fathers. His familiarity with Jewish tradition, thought and theology remained an integral part of his preaching. He drew heavily from the Hebrew Bible, and the audiences to whom he preached were well acquainted with the Hebrew Scriptures.

Jewish scholar Alan F. Segal admits, "However much I may disagree with Paul, my reading accedes to the authenticity of Paul's conversion experience. Paul considered himself part of a new Jewish sect and hoped to convince both fellow Christians and Jews of his vision of redemption."

Paul's Jewishness is evident in the focus of his writing as well. This is true of all the New Testament writers. For if the book dealt only with gentile issues, it could hardly be regarded as Jewish.
Catherine Damato | 23 April 2018

[duffyd]

There are only a handful, approx 45 manuscripts that support the text that underlines the modern versions and this text is itself primarily based on just 2, Codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus.

Both written in Greek. By Jews? I think not. Our holy texts are written in Hebrew.

The pages of the New Testament clearly follow the framework of Judaism. The first four books, the gospels, addressed a Jewish audience. They echoed the pattern of historical narratives interspersed with instruction found in the Torah. "The controversies between Jesus and the Scribes/Pharisees have no referent outside the community of Israel; Jesus' preaching of the coming kingdom could have had meaning only for Jews; the synagogues in which Jesus reads from the prophets, heals the sick, and forgives sins are Jewish houses of worship for believing Jews and not unconverted gentiles.…"7 The Jewish festivals that are celebrated throughout the pages of the New Testament were not feasts of interest to the gentiles but were part of the daily life of the Jewish people.

The four gospel accounts contain numerous references to the Hebrew Scriptures, references that deal with the messianic theme. This is clearly seen in the narration of the birth of Yeshua. His conception was prophesied in Isaiah 7:14 and referred to in Matthew: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel, which means 'God with us' " (1:23).
Damato

[duffyd]

There are only a handful, approx 45 manuscripts that support the text that underlines the modern versions and this text is itself primarily based on just 2, Codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus.

Both written in Greek. By Jews? I think not. Our holy texts are written in Hebrew.

The pages of the New Testament clearly follow the framework of Judaism. The first four books, the gospels, addressed a Jewish audience. They echoed the pattern of historical narratives interspersed with instruction found in the Torah. "The controversies between Jesus and the Scribes/Pharisees have no referent outside the community of Israel; Jesus' preaching of the coming kingdom could have had meaning only for Jews; the synagogues in which Jesus reads from the prophets, heals the sick, and forgives sins are Jewish houses of worship for believing Jews and not unconverted gentiles.…"7 The Jewish festivals that are celebrated throughout the pages of the New Testament were not feasts of interest to the gentiles but were part of the daily life of the Jewish people.

The four gospel accounts contain numerous references to the Hebrew Scriptures, references that deal with the messianic theme. This is clearly seen in the narration of the birth of Yeshua. His conception was prophesied in Isaiah 7:14 and referred to in Matthew: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel, which means 'God with us' " (1:23).
Damato

His birth in Bethlehem was foretold by the prophet Micah in chapter 5, verse 2, "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times," and quoted in Matthew 2:6.

Matthew also relies heavily on Hebrew Scriptures. In the second chapter of his narrative, he relates the flight into Egypt of Joseph and Mary (Miriam) and the slaughter of the innocents by Herod. Harking back to the law of the Nazarite in Numbers 6:1-21, Matthew concludes this story with Joseph's return to Israel to settle in Nazareth, "And he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, 'He will be called a Nazarene' " (Matthew 2:23). Damato

[duffyd]

There are only a handful, approx 45 manuscripts that support the text that underlines the modern versions and this text is itself primarily based on just 2, Codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus.

Both written in Greek. By Jews? I think not. Our holy texts are written in Hebrew.

The pages of the New Testament clearly follow the framework of Judaism. The first four books, the gospels, addressed a Jewish audience. They echoed the pattern of historical narratives interspersed with instruction found in the Torah. "The controversies between Jesus and the Scribes/Pharisees have no referent outside the community of Israel; Jesus' preaching of the coming kingdom could have had meaning only for Jews; the synagogues in which Jesus reads from the prophets, heals the sick, and forgives sins are Jewish houses of worship for believing Jews and not unconverted gentiles.…"7 The Jewish festivals that are celebrated throughout the pages of the New Testament were not feasts of interest to the gentiles but were part of the daily life of the Jewish people.

The four gospel accounts contain numerous references to the Hebrew Scriptures, references that deal with the messianic theme. This is clearly seen in the narration of the birth of Yeshua. His conception was prophesied in Isaiah 7:14 and referred to in Matthew: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel, which means 'God with us' " (1:23).
Damato

His birth in Bethlehem was foretold by the prophet Micah in chapter 5, verse 2, "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times," and quoted in Matthew 2:6.

Matthew also relies heavily on Hebrew Scriptures. In the second chapter of his narrative, he relates the flight into Egypt of Joseph and Mary (Miriam) and the slaughter of the innocents by Herod. Harking back to the law of the Nazarite in Numbers 6:1-21, Matthew concludes this story with Joseph's return to Israel to settle in Nazareth, "And he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, 'He will be called a Nazarene' " (Matthew 2:23). Damato

This appeal to fulfilled prophecy continues with Mark, who prefaces his gospel account with, "It is written in Isaiah the Prophet." He cites Isaiah, "A voice of one calling: In the desert prepare the way for the Lord" (40:3), and Malachi, "See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me" (3:1).

"It is written" occurs time and again in the pages that follow as the New Testament writers buttress their arguments with the Hebrew Scriptures-the Law, the prophets and the writings. The two testaments fit together; one does not supersede the other. "The New Testament is regarded by Christians as the fulfillment of the prophecies and the teachings contained in the Old."8

In Acts 2:14-28, Peter, known as "the apostle to the Jewish people," began his ministry with a lengthy quotation from the Hebrew prophet Joel. He then affirmed that Yeshua was the Messiah, citing Psalm 16:10, "Because you will not leave my soul in Hades, nor will you allow your Holy One to see corruption" (Acts 2:27). His hearers, with the events of the crucifixion still fresh in their memory, were "cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, 'Men and brethren, what shall we do?' "(Acts 2:37). Damato

[duffyd]

There are only a handful, approx 45 manuscripts that support the text that underlines the modern versions and this text is itself primarily based on just 2, Codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus.

Both written in Greek. By Jews? I think not. Our holy texts are written in Hebrew.

Jewish scholar David Flusser observes how the New Testament records Jewish life in the Hellenistic Diaspora. But the writings not only give us a look into Jewish customs, thinking and beliefs; they also provide us with clues concerning the languages spoken at that time.

"The spoken languages among the Jews of that period were Hebrew, Aramaic, and to an extent Greek. Until recently, it was believed by numerous scholars that the language spoken by Jesus' disciples was Aramaic.…But during that period Hebrew was both the daily language and the language of study.…This question of the spoken language is especially important for understanding the doctrines of Jesus. There are sayings of Jesus which can be rendered both into Hebrew and Aramaic; but there are some which can only be rendered into Hebrew, and none of them can be rendered only into Aramaic. One can thus demonstrate the Hebrew origins of the Gospels by retranslating them into Hebrew."

The New Testament was written by Jews, focuses on issues of interest to Jews and was strongly influenced by the Hebrew language.  same

[duffyd]

There are only a handful, approx 45 manuscripts that support the text that underlines the modern versions and this text is itself primarily based on just 2, Codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus.

Both written in Greek. By Jews? I think not. Our holy texts are written in Hebrew.

Jewish scholar David Flusser observes how the New Testament records Jewish life in the Hellenistic Diaspora. But the writings not only give us a look into Jewish customs, thinking and beliefs; they also provide us with clues concerning the languages spoken at that time.

"The spoken languages among the Jews of that period were Hebrew, Aramaic, and to an extent Greek. Until recently, it was believed by numerous scholars that the language spoken by Jesus' disciples was Aramaic.…But during that period Hebrew was both the daily language and the language of study.…This question of the spoken language is especially important for understanding the doctrines of Jesus. There are sayings of Jesus which can be rendered both into Hebrew and Aramaic; but there are some which can only be rendered into Hebrew, and none of them can be rendered only into Aramaic. One can thus demonstrate the Hebrew origins of the Gospels by retranslating them into Hebrew."

The New Testament was written by Jews, focuses on issues of interest to Jews and was strongly influenced by the Hebrew language.  Damato

For the most part, the New Testament depicts Jews dealing with other Jews on questions of importance to the Jewish people. Alan Segal says, "Study of the New Testament, undeniably a first-century source, has proven to be quite useful for validating mishnaic recollections of first-century Jewish life, but such comparisons are in their infancy. The New Testament is also better evidence for Hellenistic Judaism than is the Mishnah for first-century rabbinism."

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus the Jew tells his followers, "So do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the Gentiles run after all these things." Yeshua goes on to encourage his followers to "seek first [God's] kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." The heavenly kingdom and God's righteousness were familiar concepts to Yeshua's Jewish followers.

Likewise, when Jesus sent out his disciples, he told them, "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel."

The Book of Acts tells how Stephen, the first Jesus-believing Jewish martyr, stood before his accusers and cited the history of his people. This Jewish man spoke before a Jewish crowd, about their Jewish ancestors. And, not unlike many of the Jewish prophets of old, Stephen was dragged out of the city and stoned.

The book of Hebrews begins with: "In the past God spoke to our fathers through the prophets.…" The writer then refers to passage upon passage from the Hebrew Scriptures.

Hebrews 11 has been called "The Roll Call of Faith." It honors Abel, Enoch and Noah for their faith and goes on to commend the patriarchs, Moses and Joshua, as well as Rahab. It then follows with the heroes Gideon, Barak, Samson and Jephthah and concludes by touching on the many unnamed heroes in Israel's history. Verse 34 and following speak of those who "quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies." The unnamed martyrs, those who were tortured, mocked, scourged and who suffered affliction and torment for the sake of the God in whom they believed are all cited. These men and women gave themselves as a part of Israel's bloody legacy-Jewish martyrs, dying in the name of the God of their Jewish ancestors.

The whole chapter is a summary of Jewish history, not Babylonian, not Egyptian, not Roman history. The book of Hebrews lives up to its name. It was written by a Hebrew to persons of Hebrew descent who were well acquainted with their Scriptures.

Other New Testament writers concern themselves with Israel and with Jewish matters. James addressed "the twelve tribes scattered among the nations" (James 1:1). Peter addressed "God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered.…" (1 Peter 1:1).

Jude, in his brief letter, speaks of Sodom and Gomorrah, Michael the archangel, Moses, Cain, Balaam and Korah. These references would be baffling to anyone lacking knowledge of the Torah.

In the last book of the New Testament, Revelation, we see God's continual care for his people Israel. It is written that the tribes of Israel will one day be revived and identified (Revelation 7) and that a glorious New Jerusalem will have twelve gates inscribed with the names of the tribes of Israel (21:9-27). Damato

BTW, as you may not know,
David Flusser (Hebrew: דוד פלוסר; born 1917; died 2000) was an Israeli professor of Early Christianity and Judaism of the Second Temple Period at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. wiki

[duffyd]

Now, where were we? Oh yes. I responded to Al's insistence that JESUS never referred to Himself as GOD, that Jewish folks did not write the original autographs nor were they involved in copying the originals, etc.; that the N.T., is for the most part merely a mishmash of nonsense flooding its pages which resulted from no one penning the books and letters contained therein in the first place, etc.

[utahjazzfan]

My opinion, every person should choose respect it or no. It's always up to you and nobody can tell what to do. I don't understand religious people but anyway I appreciate they can have every opinion they want

[Bored chemist]

I responded to Al's insistence that JESUS never referred to Himself as GOD,

Yes, you did.

Do you now plan to do something that's related to the topic of the thread?

[duffyd]

My opinion, every person should choose respect it or no. It's always up to you and nobody can tell what to do. I don't understand religious people but anyway I appreciate they can have every opinion they want

Profound statement. Profound!
Do you know why they murdered Jesus? He never broke any laws, ever, and HE wasn't accused of breaking any laws when they beat Him half to death before they pounded sharp steel through His body, pinning Him up above the dirt for His mom to watch Him in agony, even as HE watched her in agony. What a bloody horror.
Oh no! He was murdered in cold blood without a fair trial because of what HE said.

[duffyd]

The gift of languages which confounded the people in ACTS 2 is given today.

Testing GOD is forbidden? “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened."
If HE isn't challenging people to test HIM, what was HE doing? HE makes a guarantee to everyone, too.
In the Greek, the words ask, seek and knock are in the continuous present tense. Keep asking, keep seeking...

[alancalverd]

He was called the author of that body of work, not the original documents.

So you agree with me. Thank you.

[Bored chemist]

My opinion, every person should choose respect it or no. It's always up to you and nobody can tell what to do. I don't understand religious people but anyway I appreciate they can have every opinion they want

Profound statement. Profound!
Do you know why they murdered Jesus? He never broke any laws, ever, and HE wasn't accused of breaking any laws when they beat Him half to death before they pounded sharp steel through His body, pinning Him up above the dirt for His mom to watch Him in in agony.
Oh no! He was murdered in cold blood without a fair trial because of what HE said.

So called witches were killed in much the same way.
Also because of what He said.
People kept slaves because of what He said.
People were killed for their sexuality because of what He said.

Perhaps the Romans should have killed him earlier (and more thoroughly)

[alancalverd]

Interesting.

There is nothing recorded in the four Gospels where Jesus specifically mentions homosexuality the way Paul did in 1 Cor. 6:9.

Likewise classical Hebrew "eved" (and presumably Aramaic) doesn't distinguish between slave, servant and indentured worker, but the OT sets down rules for the proper treatment of all employees according to time-limited contract.

Which supports my point that the real problem isn't Christ, but Christians.

[duffyd]

He was called the author of that body of work, not the original documents.

So you agree with me. Thank you.

Ooops! I did it again! Without trying! I hate to gloat, but utilizing no effort whatsoever, I won the batting crown, AGAIN. 1,000 percent. Thanks Al. Honestly? I couldn't have done it without ya. Not only hitting everything, but blasting homeruns at every at bat. I do admit, I thought I would face at least a little opposition, but, Al not only bombed, he forfeited half way though.

 Most of all what time, (history), has shown us is simply this: no rational argument makes a dent in the apologetics of Christianity. Many, many fine, educated, brilliant teams of combatants have invested all their energy, time and resources into defeating HIS claims. Watching Him die slowly in terrible agony once upon a time, they thought they had done it. They were delighted, thrilled, ecstatic, believing they had rid the world of HIM once and for all. Little did they know. Little did they know! Death couldn't stop HIM. HE defeated death--and still does every day.

[duffyd]

My opinion, every person should choose respect it or no. It's always up to you and nobody can tell what to do. I don't understand religious people but anyway I appreciate they can have every opinion they want

You don't understand religious people? You ain't the only one. I have met quite a few boobs who play at this thing and I'm always baffled why they bother. If you don't intend to follow Him with all your heart, why pretend? Why put on a show? Go out and get it on for Pete's sake.

[Bored chemist]

Ooops! I did it again! Without trying! I hate to gloat, but utilizing no effort whatsoever, I won the batting crown, AGAIN. 1,000 percent. Thanks Al. Honestly? I couldn't have done it without ya. Not only hitting everything, but blasting homeruns at every at bat. I do admit, I thought I would face at least a little opposition, but, Al not only bombed, he forfeited half way though.

What delusion is that about?

Watching Him die slowly in terrible agony once upon a time, they thought they had done it.

Which "they" do you mean?