Jews killed Jesus: NFL hopeful causes stir after tweet

[ayesha.a]

More tripe from an indian

Aurangzeb Alamgir was King of Hindustan , that did not mean he was Hindu

There is no such thing as "Jewish" ethnicity , Judaism is a religion , its followers are Jews. Ethnically there are some who are Africans ( Ethiopians ) , some European (Ashkenazi) some are Sephardic who are from Middle East and Iberian Peninsula , these are not the same ethnicity getting high on cow cola does not change this either

I would have explained some things to you, had you maintained some decency. It is a waste of time to educate people who speak in this manner, and attack the poster instead of the posts. Enjoy your camel cola.

Prophet Jacob a.s had 12 sons including Prophet Joseph a.s and one named Juddah. The descendants of other eleven which can't be verified but the claiming ones who still practice juddaism, prefer to be called Bani Israel NOT Jews and one such tribe thought to be descendants of Jacob a.s in in India too can't remember the name now but you can look up.

Yes, I know about the Bene Israel of India. They claim to be one of the ten lost tribes. The narrative of the "ten lost tribes" is itself a matter of historical dispute as of now. If we go strictly by historic records, that narrative of the "lost tribes" seems to be mythical.

BTW, some of the Bene Israel in India also settled around Karachi, before independence. All of them, including the ones in India, migrated to Israel post 1948.

I've also read about a Jewish community in India's north-east, who recently migrated to Israel because they were believed to be one of the lost tribes. I forget the details, but this was about ten years ago.

Adding later: I got it, it's the 'Bnei Menashe':

Bnei Menashe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[pakdefender]

I would have explained some things to you, had you maintained some decency. It is a waste of time to educate people who speak in this manner, and attack the poster instead of the posts. Enjoy your camel cola.

just admit it , that you have no answer to the points raised in post #28

 

[ayesha.a]

just admit it , that you have no answer to the points raised in post #28

Sigh. All right, I'll address that post.

More tripe from an indian

Aurangzeb Alamgir was King of Hindustan , that did not mean he was Hindu

Depends - are you talking about the religion 'hinduism'? Then no, Aurangzeb wan not a hindu, he was well and truly a sunni muslim. But are you using the word "hindu" in the sense that the ancient Persians and Arabs did, ie, somebody who lives in the Indian subcontinent? Then yes, Aurangzeb was a hindu, as are you, if you live east of Indus. You do know that one word can have different meanings, right? That's also the case with the word 'jew'.

BTW, I hope you know that Aurangzeb's reign was the beginning of Mughal downfall. Their treasury was depleted due to wars with Pathans (in today's FATA), Sikhs, Marathas, Ahoms, various South Indians etc. His reign was directly responsible for the British conquest. I'm just mentioning this because some Pakistanis misguidedly revere him.

There is no such thing as "Jewish" ethnicity , Judaism is a religion , its followers are Jews. Ethnically there are some who are Africans ( Ethiopians ) , some European (Ashkenazi) some are Sephardic who are from Middle East and Iberian Peninsula , these are not the same ethnicity getting high on cow cola does not change this either

Then explain to me how there are so many atheist jews, if the jewish identity is purely religious.

You are partially right, that they are not a single race or ethnicity, but a collection of a few ethnicities. That is how it is today, due to the intermingling of the original Israelites. Historically (not according to the religious narrative), 'Israelites' are the people who lived in Canaan upto the 6th century BC.

Jewish ethnic divisions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Israelites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Half of all Israelis today are atheists, and yet identify themselves very strongly as Jewish - because to them, it is an ethnicity, and a culture, not just a religion. There are plenty of "atheistic jews". That should tell you that 'jew' does not simply refer to the religion.

To give a comparison, there are some "atheist hindus" as well - notably, the founder of the RSS, VD Savarkar. He was a passionate atheist and a passionate hindu, who started hindutva politics in India. IIRC, he was the first person to use the term 'hindutva', which the present day right wing parties like BJP still use to describe themselves. Unlike 'christian' or 'muslim', 'hindu' and 'jew' can refer either to the religion, or to the culture, or to the ethnicities. As I said before, the same word can have different meanings.

When Hitler wanted to implement the "final solution" to eradicate all jews, do you think he meant the religion? If so, it would have been easy for all jews to convert to christianity, at least overtly. No, the nazis wanted to eliminate the "jewish race", which they contrasted with the "aryan race". It was very much a racial/ethnic term, not religious.

The Jewish court Sanhedrin did trial and convicted Jesus , the execution was carried out by the Romans , this is according to Christian narrative

What do you think the Romans executed him for? What was the charge?

The Romans could only punish people for violating Roman laws, not judaic religious ones. He was executed for treason/sedition, for claiming to be the "king of jews". That claim obviously undermined Roman colonial rule of Judea.

 

[pakdefender]

Depends - are you talking about the religion 'hinduism'? Then no, Aurangzeb wan not a hindu, he was well and truly a sunni muslim. But are you using the word "hindu" in the sense that the ancient Persians and Arabs did, ie, somebody who lives in the Indian subcontinent? Then yes, Aurangzeb was a hindu, as are you, if you live east of Indus. You do know that one word can have different meanings, right? That's also the case with the word 'jew'.

BTW, I hope you know that Aurangzeb's reign was the beginning of Mughal downfall. Their treasury was depleted due to wars with Pathans (in today's FATA), Sikhs, Marathas, Ahoms, various South Indians etc. His reign was directly responsible for the British conquest. I'm just mentioning this because some Pakistanis misguidedly revere him.

There is no "depends" , Aurangzeb was a Muslim emperor he was King over the hindus but was not a hindu.
When someone says that I am King of Africa it will not make him African , same way for someone to say I am King of Jews does not make him a Jew

Then explain to me how there are so many atheist jews, if the jewish identity is purely religious.

You are partially right, that they are not a single race or ethnicity, but a collection of a few ethnicities. That is how it is today, due to the intermingling of the original Israelites. Historically (not according to the religious narrative), 'Israelites' are the people who lived in Canaan upto the 6th century BC.

Jewish ethnic divisions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Israelites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Half of all Israelis today are atheists, and yet identify themselves very strongly as Jewish - because to them, it is an ethnicity, and a culture, not just a religion. There are plenty of "atheistic jews". That should tell you that 'jew' does not simply refer to the religion.

To give a comparison, there are some "atheist hindus" as well - notably, the founder of the RSS, VD Savarkar. He was a passionate atheist and a passionate hindu, who started hindutva politics in India. IIRC, he was the first person to use the term 'hindutva', which the present day right wing parties like BJP still use to describe themselves. Unlike 'christian' or 'muslim', 'hindu' and 'jew' can refer either to the religion, or to the culture, or to the ethnicities. As I said before, the same word can have different meanings.

When Hitler wanted to implement the "final solution" to eradicate all jews, do you think he meant the religion? If so, it would have been easy for all jews to convert to christianity, at least overtly. No, the nazis wanted to eliminate the "jewish race", which they contrasted with the "aryan race". It was very much a racial/ethnic term, not religious.

Again no "partially" , its absolutely correct to say Jew is not an ethnicity it's a religion , look at this picture , this is the Ethiopian jew who was beaten in Israel , can anyone say that him and Netanyahu are same ethnicity , part of same "jewish race"

What do you think the Romans executed him for? What was the charge?

The Romans could only punish people for violating Roman laws, not judaic religious ones. He was executed for treason/sedition, for claiming to be the "king of jews". That claim obviously undermined Roman colonial rule of Judea.

The setup to the trial before the Roman court was was done by the Jewish Sanhedrin court. Who wanted him dead for a) not observing the Sabbath b) Chasing the money lending Jews from the Temple c) preaching contradictory views about Gentiles which were long held by the Jews d) Claiming to be the Messiah while not being from lineage of David ( as he was born to the virgin Mary and there was no biological father , this also among the reason that Jews did not accept him )

 

[terry5]

Don't try to drag your religious stories into this...if truth be told there wasn't any Jesus..there were many people who claimed they were Christ's and many people were executed..this was a fashion in those days ..even in Saudi Arabia people were born who claimed to be prophets..all are fake.

Any proof ? & dont go and hide .

More tripe from an indian

Known for it

 

[ayesha.a]

There is no "depends" , Aurangzeb was a Muslim emperor he was King over the hindus but was not a hindu.
When someone says that I am King of Africa it will not make him African , same way for someone to say I am King of Jews does not make him a Jew

If that man was born in Africa, to one of the African races (Tutu, Mongo, Chewa, Zulu, Kanuri etc), then he is an African. If a man born in Britain claims to be (or becomes) the "King of Africa", he still won't be an African. Queen Victoria was the first empress of India, but she was not Indian. Jesus of Nazareth was a jew (by descent), born to one of the jewish tribes of Roman occupied Judea. He proclaimed to be the messiah prophesied in the Jewish scriptures. People who accepted his claim became christians, and people who did not believe him continued being jews (in the religious sense). The messianic prophesy itself was part of the jewish religion.

Aurangzeb was born in Gujarat in present day India. That makes him an "Indian", or a "hindu" as people in Arabia or Persia used to refer to people living east of Sindhu (Hindhu) river.

So yes, he was a hindu in that sense. And no, he was not a hindu in the sense of somebody following the hindu religion. Religiously, he was well and truly a sunni muslim. You are simply refusing to see the fact that "hindu", like "jew", has multiple meanings.

Again no "partially" , its absolutely correct to say Jew is not an ethnicity it's a religion , look at this picture , this is the Ethiopian jew who was beaten in Israel , can anyone say that him and Netanyahu are same ethnicity , part of same "jewish race"

Repeating: "Jew" can refer to either religion or ethnicity. The black fellow in that picture may be a jew because he follows the jewish religion. (Or he could be one of the recognized jewish ethnicities as well, I don't know.) Either (or both) of those criteria qualifies a person as a jew.

BTW, you seem to forget that I agreed that the "jewish race" is not one single race or ethnicity, but a collection of a few. A native Swedish or Han Chinese or Australoid person would definitely not be jewish, in the racial/ethnic sense.

The setup to the trial before the Roman court was was done by the Jewish Sanhedrin court. Who wanted him dead for a) not observing the Sabbath b) Chasing the money lending Jews from the Temple c) preaching contradictory views about Gentiles which were long held by the Jews d) Claiming to be the Messiah while not being from lineage of David ( as he was born to the virgin Mary and there was no biological father , this also among the reason that Jews did not accept him )

You should read more about this. There are plenty of reasons why a lot of jews hated him, and wanted him dead. But that's not my point. The point is, why did the Roman authorities execute him? Do you think they cared about a jewish messiah's lineage? They followed the Roman law in their courts. He was charged with and executed for treason/sedition.

You conveniently skipped one question - if "jew" is simply a religious term, how is it possible that there are so many atheistic jews? Shouldn't that be an oxymoron?

 

[kuge]

If that man was born in Africa, to one of the African races (Tutu, Mongo, Chewa, Zulu, Kanuri etc), then he is an African. If a man born in Britain claims to be (or becomes) the "King of Africa", he still won't be an African. Queen Victoria was the first empress of India, but she was not Indian. Jesus of Nazareth was a jew (by descent), born to one of the jewish tribes of Roman occupied Judea. He proclaimed to be the messiah prophesied in the Jewish scriptures. People who accepted his claim became christians, and people who did not believe him continued being jews (in the religious sense). The messianic prophesy itself was part of the jewish religion.

Aurangzeb was born in Gujarat in present day India. That makes him an "Indian", or a "hindu" as people in Arabia or Persia used to refer to people living east of Sindhu (Hindhu) river.

So yes, he was a hindu in that sense. And no, he was not a hindu in the sense of somebody following the hindu religion. Religiously, he was well and truly a sunni muslim. You are simply refusing to see the fact that "hindu", like "jew", has multiple meanings.



Repeating: "Jew" can refer to either religion or ethnicity. The black fellow in that picture may be a jew because he follows the jewish religion. (Or he could be one of the recognized jewish ethnicities as well, I don't know.) Either (or both) of those criteria qualifies a person as a jew.

BTW, you seem to forget that I agreed that the "jewish race" is not one single race or ethnicity, but a collection of a few. A native Swedish or Han Chinese or Australoid person would definitely not be jewish, in the racial/ethnic sense.



You should read more about this. There are plenty of reasons why a lot of jews hated him, and wanted him dead. But that's not my point. The point is, why did the Roman authorities execute him? Do you think they cared about a jewish messiah's lineage? They followed the Roman law in their courts. He was charged with and executed for treason/sedition.

You conveniently skipped one question - if "jew" is simply a religious term, how is it possible that there are so many atheistic jews? Shouldn't that be an oxymoron?

Abraham came from Ur in today's iraq where he & his family served many gods...
He was called by god to leave his hometown to canaan land...
Thus he was a non-jew to begin with.

the jews today are those who are descendants of abrahamic family with sarah his wife.

but in the spirit of the messiah, a real jew is the one who has the same belief as abraham who also believes one of his offsprings is the messiah- jesus who is rejected by today's jews.

Rom_2:28 For a person is not a Jew because of his appearance, nor is circumcision something just external and physical.
Rom_2:29 No, a person is a Jew inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, brought about by the Spirit, not by a written law. That person's praise will come from God, not from people.

the romans executed the messiah to please the jews..that's it

 

[Dakóvic]

Not to mention the fact that according to Christian theology, Jesus was prophesied to be killed so he could die for their sins.

It was prophecied that Jesus would be betrayed by one of His desiples. The amount of money that He was betrayed for was also prophecied. There is over 40 prophecies about Jesus in OT, all were fulfilled.

 

[Dakóvic]

who is the anti-christ?

When Jesus returns its all over. Time ends when Jesus returns. Just like Jesus said, He is the Son of God.

 

[kuge]

When Jesus returns its all over. Time ends when Jesus returns. Just like Jesus said, He is the Son of God.

who do u think is the anti-christ?

 

[Dakóvic]

who do u think is the anti-christ?

He will reveal himself when the time is right. Bible describes him pretty well, for example, he will make 7 year deal (somekind of a peace treaty?) with Israel and after 3,5years he will betray Gods people.

 

[ayesha.a]

Abraham came from Ur in today's iraq where he & his family served many gods...
He was called by god to leave his hometown to canaan land...
Thus he was a non-jew to begin with.

the jews today are those who are descendants of abrahamic family with sarah his wife.

but in the spirit of the messiah, a real jew is the one who has the same belief as abraham who also believes one of his offsprings is the messiah- jesus who is rejected by today's jews.

Rom_2:28 For a person is not a Jew because of his appearance, nor is circumcision something just external and physical.
Rom_2:29 No, a person is a Jew inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, brought about by the Spirit, not by a written law. That person's praise will come from God, not from people.

the romans executed the messiah to please the jews..that's it

From the POV of the Jews, that is a self referential and illogical position. You are quoting the "Epistle to the Romans" from the new testament of the bible. The Jews do not accept the new testament as gospel. They do not believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the prophesied messiah, and they do not accept the new testament. So it is pointless to quote the new testament to decide who is a jew and who is not.

Bear in mind that I am only commenting upon the historical narrative, not the religious narrative of any of the three Abrahamic religions.

As for your last sentence: Yes, from the POV of political expediency, the Romans executed Jesus to please the jews. But even so, they had to have a reason, they had to follow the law. (Or at least, pretend to follow it.) Their administration was very similar to the modern world's. The Romans were a society that followed laws, not a society where the government (or king or Cesar) could execute people according to their whim. They had law courts, they had trials. Only a person convicted of breaking a law could be executed. And Jesus of Nazareth was determined to have engaged in sedition, by proclaiming himself as "king of the jews". That was the formal reason for his execution.

Of course, placating their jewish subjects was also a big factor. That is how politics works, even today.

 

[raptor22]

That's a well-known fact that Jews are responsible for death of many prophets ...

 

[ruby007]

And Jesus was a Buddhist!!

No if he was JEW , the jews would not have killed him he was outcast claiming anti jewish material

Jews are just trying to change history now

Really !! then what was he.. a muslim ?? considering islam never existed at that time