"zayton" <zayton@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

1. If a Rastafarian now, who does not believe in Allah or Mohammed,

to believe that Allah is the one God and Mohammed is his prophet, are

then Rastafarian or Muslim?

Not a situation which has any similarity to early first century
Christianity, which was simply one aspect of Judiasm.

2. If a Hindu now, who does not believe in Jesus, comes to believe in

Jesus

as his personal Lord and savior, are they then Hindu or Christian?

Not a situation which has any similarity to early first century

Christianity, which was simply one aspect of Judiasm

3. If a Christian now , who does not believe in Allah or Mohammed,

to

believe that Allah is the one God and Mohamed is his prophet, are they

then

Christian or Muslim?

Not a situation which has any similarity to early first century
Christianity, which was simply one aspect of Judiasm

4a. If a Jew now, who does not believe in Jesus, comes to believe in

Jesus

as his personal Lord and savior, are they then Jewish or Christian?

They are Christian.. Since AD 135 Judiasm and Christianity have been
seperate.

4a. If a Jew in ancient times, who did not believe in Jesus, came to
believe in Jesus as his personal Lord and savior, were they then

Christian?

They were then both, if by "ancient times" you mean the first century.

could, at that time be a Jew without being a Christian, but, at the
beginning, you could not be a Christian without being a Jew, and, until

AD, it was still possible to be both at the same time.

You refuse to answer simple direct questions because the answers show
you have to twist common sense to get the result you want. Dishonest
and shabby.

#1 According to your theory, what are the a) necessary and b)
sufficient beliefs one must hold to be a Christian?

#2 According to your theory, what are the a) necessary and b)
sufficient beliefs one must hold to be a Jew?

You refuse to answer simple direct questions because the answers show
you have to twist common sense to get the result you want. Dishonest
and shabby.

#1 According to your theory, what are the a) necessary and b)
sufficient beliefs one must hold to be a Christian?

#2 According to your theory, what are the a) necessary and b)
sufficient beliefs one must hold to be a Jew?

Dirk Hartog

You are completely wrong, because, as I have patiently pointed out
many times now, original "christianity" was not yet a separate
religion from Judaism.

Interesting theory. On what date did the two religions separate?

It's not a theory, it's a fact supported by the NT, Josephus, Roman
writers and church writers.
And "the two religions" didn't separate on any single date. The
process evolved over time, although it is certain that full-blown
Christianity was an invention of the Fourth Century.

It was a sect within Judaism, called the sect
of the Nazoreans, or "the Way". It was composed of Jews who worshiped
in the temple and attended the synagogue and

So your theory is that Jesus' first followers, in Galilee, when they
wanted to worship, they went to the temple in Jerusalem? LOL.

It's not a theory, it's a plausible statement based on NT textual
evidence, Paul's letters, Josephus, and other early writers.

Many of Jesus' first followers were Galileans and of course they
would have normally travelled to the temple in Jerusalem periodically
as a ritually expected requirement.

However, after Jesus' death, they
_moved_ to Jerusalem to set up their messianic headquarters.

Apparently you don't understand the concepts of travel and relocation?

Evidence please -- if you have any.

The evidence is not mine, but the NT's and history's. I doubt
you're really interested but if you are, read the post-Easter
narratives of Luke, John, and Acts. Better yet, read the letters of
Paul - who was contemporary to and involved in this event - which
establish the fact that the Jewish Jesus movement was centered in
Jerusalem. In addition, consult Hegessipus, Eusebius, Josephus, et
al.

That impossible silliness aside,

No, it's still here, as you keep inventing and spouting it.

what evidence do you have that there
even _were_ synagogues in Galilee in the first century?

What evidence do you have for the egregious claim that there weren't?
Or since you fantasize that Galileans couldn't/didn't worship in the
temple, and since you also fantasize that they didn't have synagogues,
perhaps you imagine that they never worshipped, or worshipped in the
open air or in pagan shrines? LOL

Or are you saying Jesus didn't gather followers in Galilee? Evidence
please. ROTFLOL at you.

That statement is really too stupid to grace with a reply, but since
you're a glutton for punishment, I'm happy to:
if Jesus gathered Galilean followers, he would have met many of them
in, and through, and consolidated them in the synagogue. After Jesus'
death, his Galilean followers _relocated_ to headquarters in
Jerusalem. Again, this scenario presents you with the apparently
insurmountable difficulty of grasping the concept of moving,
relocation, and emigration.

Religions are differentiated by belief, not by race.

Irrelevant to this discussion.

Believe in
Christ, one religion; don't believe in Christ, another religion.

Wrong, since belief in the messiah is completely Jewish. There were
several groups of Jews who believed that the messiah had come, and
they remained believing and practicing Jews within Judaism.

Not
hard to understand really, once you get past the uneducated
anachronism.

The uneducated claims are entirely yours, of course. You don't even
grasp the basics, such as messianism being completely Jewish.

Jews back then didn't believe in Christ.

Yes, they did.

Evidence please, if you have any, that Josephus and Philo and the
folks at Qumran and the priests at the temple in Jerusalem "believed
in Christ." Utter fantasy.

The Jesus Jews believed in messiah/christ. They were practicing,
believing Jews who believed that in Jesus, the messiah/christ had
come.
"Jews back then didn't believe in Christ." Utter fantasy, since
several groups thought their leaders were messianic (e.g., Bar
Kochba's supporter, Rabbi Aqiba).

They existed in the sect of Judaism known as
messianic or Nazorean Judaism. They worshiped in the Jewish temple
and made Jerusalem their capital. They were led by Jesus' brother
James who was famous among the Jews for his "righteousness."
Jews were expecting christ and Jesus-Jews identified Jesus as being
that Christ, Christ being a completely Jewish category by which to
explain the completely Jewish Jesus.

Evidence please that "Jews were expecting christ."

Another bad joke/red herring.

Where does
Josephus, a Jew, say he was expecting Christ? Where does Philo, a Jew,
say he was expecting Christ?

Obviously you're absurdly unfamiliar with both Second Temple Judaism
and Hebrew Bible messianic texts.
The Qumranites were expecting two Messiahs; Samaritans were
expecting a Moses-like Messiah; popular Judaism was expecting a
Davidic Messiah; Josephus writes of messianic movements and the
messianic hope.
Whether or not Josephus (or the other writers you mentioned)
personally shared the messianic hope is irrelevant to the fact that he
documents its existence. Roman writers document it, as do the actual
letters of Bar Kochba.
Recall too that the subject is "Jews were expecting Christ".
"Jews" without a qualifying definite article (THE Jews) is indefinite.
Therefore the connotation is not that all Jews or every Jew expected
the messiah, but that some Jews, or Jews generally with individual
exceptions, were expecting the messiah.

When they became Christians, they quit being Jews.

When they became Jesus' followers, they became the Jewish followers
of the Jewish Jesus,

Yes -- but only because your theory doesn't understand the difference
between had-Jewish-parents Jewishness and
belong-to-the-Jewish-religion Jewishness.

It isn't my theory. It's yours, a red herring which has nothing to
do with the historical reality that messianism was a core Jewish
theological category. Your goony "racial Judaism vs. religious
Judaism" theory, besides being your own attempt to derail this
discussion, is factually incorrect, because Jewish believers in Jesus
were both racially and religiously Jewish.

Religions are
differentiated by belief, not by race. Believe in Christ, one
religion; don't believe in Christ, another religion. Not hard to
understand really.

You love to repeat your ignorant claims, and your intellectual
incapacities, that's for sure.

But the answer stays the same: Jews who believed that the promised
messiah had come in the person of a Jesus or a Bar Kochba were
expressing thoroughly Jewish ideas. To believe in a messiah was not
only NOT heretical, it was the essence of Jewish hope.

called "the sect of the Nazoreans." Other Jewish
Jesus-people were called "the sect of the Ebionites.".

What is your evidence for which group came first?

Read it again. I didn't claim that _either group_ "came first".
Really, you must learn to stop projecting your own words onto what
others write.

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 22:30:11 -0700, "angelicusrex"
<whisperindave@msn.com> wrote:

snip

But the fact is that Jesus was a
historical personage, he did live and die and come back to life and then

again.

That is the belief of many. It is not an established fact. There is
not one piece of evidence for it.

He promoted healing and teaching. And he promoted the idea that God
was the progenitor of all people.

As did many.


None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.