jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (84 posts)

The Truth about Christ

  1. EphremHagos profile image60
    EphremHagosposted 5 years ago

    Does Christianity speak the truth about Christ?

    1. aka-dj profile image80
      aka-djposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Hope so!

      No-one else does a better job.

      1. EphremHagos profile image60
        EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You will be surprised!

      2. aka-dj profile image80
        aka-djposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You mean, others besides Christians preach Christ?

        Who?

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Quran...

          1. aka-dj profile image80
            aka-djposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            No, Koran preaches Jesus, son of Mary.

            Christ is Son of God, and is ONLY preached by Christians.
            He is also indirectly affirmed by Jews. They are waiting for and believing in the Messiah, just miss the point that Jesus IS the Messiah

            1. pisean282311 profile image57
              pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

              obviously it is said as son of god , i am just saying which speaks about christ in better way.....title is Truth about christ...not what bible says ...On serious notes there is no point of this debate...for believers christ is god or son of god etc etc...for non believer of bible christ is messiah or peigambar or didnt even exist...All have their own reason for saying what they say...

    2. DoubleScorpion profile image87
      DoubleScorpionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Since Christianity is taken from the Bible, I would say they are only partially correct...There are many other documents that speak of Christ (Jesus). I would think to find the truth, one would have to read all sources that contain information about Christ and then determine what would be "truth" when completed.

      1. EphremHagos profile image60
        EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The Bible and Christianity are in diametrical opposition. The former has a road map to God; the latter lacks personal knowledge of God. 

        Suppose also that "the whole world could not hold the books that would be written" about Christ?
        (John 21:25)

        I would hope, therefore, we can agree (based on the gospel) on a more practical way of personally knowing Jesus Christ as he really is.

        1. DoubleScorpion profile image87
          DoubleScorpionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You asked in the OP if Christianity holds the truth about Christ. I don't think they have the whole story.

          One can believe in Christ without being a Christian. One can have a personal relationship with Christ and not claim to be a Christian.

          Just because someone claims to be Christian does not mean they know or hold the truth of Christ. There are many people and denominations that claim to be Christian and to hold the truth of Christ, but few agree completely with each other on who Christ actually is or what his message truly was.

          1. EphremHagos profile image60
            EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Without the "rock foundation" time-sensitive to Christ's death on the cross(Matt. 16: 13-28), theology-based Christianity is a mere obstacle raised against the knowledge of Jesus Christ. I would not make such a serious accusation without the Biblical proof and its accompanying confirmation.

            True faith and religion (characterized by the presence or absence of  "complete freedom", respectively) are  incompatible. (John 4: 21-26; Heb. 10: 19-25)

            As a religious Christian or member of any church, one cannot know, have faith in the self-revealing Jesus Christ (in his death on the cross) and grow in his grace and knowledge. The evidence is all around us.

            1. DoubleScorpion profile image87
              DoubleScorpionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              ??Isn't that pretty much what I just said??

              1. EphremHagos profile image60
                EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, it now is! I only wanted to cover all the bases just in case.

                In any case, one cannot over-emphasize an essential point abandoned today. I hope you agree.

    3. TMMason profile image71
      TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The Hebrew (Old), and, Christian (New) Testament, speak the truth as to Yeshua the Christ.

      It never ceases to amaze me. Science and haters have attempted for some time to destroy the veracity of the Bible, only to fail in thier attempts.

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        While I can't speak for the "haters" I believe you are a little off in science.  Yes, it has tried for some time to verify the veracity of the Bible, and yes, it has failed in its attempt, but I don't think science has tried to actually destroy it.

        Science is about truth, TMM - not destruction.  If that truth destroys some hard held belief (flat earth perhaps) then so be it, but the aim is never destruction.  Only to find truth.

        1. TMMason profile image71
          TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Science is a tool... and many would it use to shatter religion if they could, Wild.

          Not all... but many.

          You say.... "Yes, it has tried for some time to verify the veracity of the Bible, and yes, it has failed in its attempt,..."

          No...

          Science has not been in the bussiness of proving the varacity of the bible.

          Though there are some many in the fields who continue to use the Bible as a guide and seek what it refers to in order to show that it does speak the truth. But these poeple are commonly ridiculed and drummed out of the main-stream.

          One perfect eample of this is Prof. Walter vieth, the man was on the top of his game in the fields and Universities, top Prof. top Lecturer, awards from the Royal Academy of Sciences and many other distinguished groups and academies... then he turned against the current wisdom, Evolution of Humans, the Big Bang, etc..., that was it...they attempted to destroy him. His life story is very interesting... and all he did was list the questions which are raised by the current theories and cannot be answered.

          And that was the end.

          http://walterveith.org/

          http://amazingdiscoveries.tv/c/9/Science/

          http://walterveith.org/walter-veith-life-story.html

          PS; I am not an advent, but I would suggest anyone interested in the Science Vs Religion debate to review this man's videos on the controversy.

          They, Science, have under-taken the attempts in order to under-mine the veracity of the bible, not support it. Very few in the main-stream of the fields have hid the fact that they believe the bible to be false... and they try like hell to show it so.

          But as I said... the bible has withstood all their attempts to date.

          Even in such matters of what people infer the bible says, such as geo-centricity, which can niether be proved nor dis-proved without moving outside the system and looking in from an objective point.

          Of course I do not see the bible saying anything about geo-centrism in any other way than that of structures and prose. Like John, when he speaks of the Word of God using personification as a prose, as in the psalms and thier discription of Wisdom as a goddess, are we to believe Wisdom a true goddess... no of course not.

          And in matters which most laymen would say, why don't the science people attack that, it is obviously wrong,.. such as the human race coming from Adam and not Eve, such a glaring suppossed error should be fair game. But now we all know that it would take a man to produce the Human Race, because a woman does not have the required chromosomes... so it was right on that also.

          No wild... science has been at war with religion because it is infected by those who posit their atheistic views above all else as truth, and attempt to prove them, instead of observing with no bias and pre-concieved notions of the truth. And taking the result for what it is.

          And PS; The bible does not say the world is flat. Again... lets not confuse prose and structure with plain speak. The four winds and "four corners" are simply figures of speech. And anyone who thinks to use such as evidence of the flat earth is an idiot of the first class and should not be allowed to think any more.

          They should be labotomized on the spot.

          1. A Troubled Man profile image60
            A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            But instead, many are using science to find cures for ailments, invent better energy systems and other technologies to allow YOU to live a better life, for example. Many have little interest and time to care about religious delusions.



            Of course, religious delusions have no place in the world of intelligence.



            Here is a very good expose on Veith and his video sets "Amazing Discoveries" where it is found he is lying.

            http://home.nctv.com/jackjan/item46.htm



            lol



            No, Christianity has been at war with science because Christians are paranoid that atheistic views are infecting it.



            Perhaps, but the main malcontents that argued the "four corners" did in fact represent a flat earth are long gone because they were early Christians who refused to accept Aristotle's spherical model.

            Lobotomized, indeed. lol

            1. TMMason profile image71
              TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              At what point in this conversation did you hear me say science was no good?

              See... more of your extremism.

              You seem to always twist what people say, and then act like you have done something great and wonderous.

              Gimmie a break.

              And yes an anonomous rant based on 3 hours of sleeping through the tapes which comprise tens of dozens of hours. Thurough.

              Yes... excellent troub.

              What a laugh.

              The man was a super-star among you all till he turned.

              What a laugh you atheists are... he is a great guy till you do not agree then he is criminal liar nomber 1.

              LOL... hysterical.

              One could argue that BS he spews against Vieth is simply the same ole rhetorict spewed by the Est against anyone who dares to question.

              Is the man right about everything... I highly doubt it... none of us are ever always right.

              Does he know his science, yes.

              So as I said... people can look to see and then check his facts. You would all be surprised what science claims to know, when in fact they have no clue.

              Science has become a game of assumptions based on guesses based on speculation and presuppositions, mixed up and spat out in a new age doctrine of Secular Humanism. The atheist Evolutionist ones are more fanatical than any religious folk I have ever met.

              And all you have to do is listen to Dawkins or any of the other High Priest of the church of Sciences. They will tell you straight out, no uncertain terms, they want religion gone and will use science to accomplish that task.

              1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Ah, I see you never actually read the article where he goes point by point the lies and deceit contained in those videos.



                If he does, then he is a liar. If he doesn't, then he's making up stuff that is wrong.



                One can just read the article to see the facts and see he is a liar and a fraud.



                Thanks for proving my point about being paranoid. lol

                1. TMMason profile image71
                  TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes I read it.. that is why I know he did not watch the vids for more than 3 hours...and he states clearly from the beginning of the article that he did not watch the videos, nor did he listen to Vieths arguments.

                  He simply assumes that vieth will use the same ole points, and then cuts and pastes what he assumes the answers would be.

                  As I said, he spouts the same ole BS you all have slurred the other side with for decades.

                  Simple to see.

                  he stated himself he didn't bother to watch... or did you not read the article you posted?

                  "I could only force myself to view about three hours of the DVD"

                  "Three hours of watching Walter Veith dupe his credulous audience was all that I could endure"

                  "While I did not subject myself to all of Veith�s anti-evolution nonsense on the DVDs,"

                  how many times does he have to say he didn't bother to watch them.

                  So anyone can read the article and see he is speaking out his ass, because he hasn't reviewed the material. And he says it over and over... did not watch them.

                  he simply lays out the same ole arguments in the assumption that vieth is using them.

                  And yes I saw the "claims" info... assorted info that has been around forever.

                  He isn't even aware if they are the actual claims Vieth makes... but since he has heard the arguments before from others, not Vieth's, but in general, then they are all the same.

                  He even says so...

                  "Although I do not recall Veith�s statements verbatim, there were a number of general claims that he made that clearly reveal the duplicity of his arguments."

                  yes... three hours is a long time to retain something. I see his point... LOL

                  He further states...

                  "{Notice that many of these responses come from a section of the TalkOrigins website known as the �Index to Creationist Claims.�   Creationists repeat the same hackneyed arguments so often that a special database has been developed to save time in addressing many of them.} "

                  Because he assumes he knows what is being said... then he doesnt have to actually listen to vieth... he has heard it all before and therefore knows the responses to cut and paste. WHAT A JOKE!!! And you call that a source? HAHA HAHAHA

                  HAHAHAHA LOLLLLL...

                  you are a funny funny man, troub.

                  Oh and you would argue he threw away his lifes work and career, simply to be a joke?

                  Yeah right. The logic you all use is so flaked.

                  1. brotheryochanan profile image60
                    brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    In a loving way i just have to say: nobody prints misinformation, unresearched baloney, lies and personal opinions more that that troubled man, but i am not critical, this is just truth, proved over and over and again I wish him well in whatever his outcome is to be, but surely one must realize that doing this type of job only makes the poster look foolish and i wish no one to look foolish I say this only to your edification.
                    Again sorry if this is painful but I want you to be the best person you can be, and i hate to assess but you sound like a raving lunatic, an extreme fanatic... If, with big hugs.. you can print truth then please do, many will have more respect for you. be edified and have a great day. smile

                  2. brotheryochanan profile image60
                    brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    ahhh the poor guy, we must be very loving to this fragile one. Big hugs to ATM, throw out the flower petals and strike up the band.. let us celebrate growth and not hinder one so hurting. He must be careful because if he ever changes his opinion his own will turn on him, for how shall they not? Oh the difficult situation he is in.. let us pray...

                    Be at peace we are only here to help.

                  3. A Troubled Man profile image60
                    A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Then, you would have read this...

                    "I have checked in the scientific literature available on the Internet and in my own reference works many of Veith's claims about the scientific evidence.   I have not taken the time to check them all, but every single one I have been able to check has turned out to be demonstrably wrong."

              2. brotheryochanan profile image60
                brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                So true
                in a peaceful and loving way, i would like to say, if you realize that the theories you take for facts are not facts but theories. And please hear that i am not being critical. Science has its mask on and scientists have their agendas also. But if you can imagine that there is a double doctrine going on and please again, recall this is a loving tone, I would like to suggest you study some different material and read the opposing arguments to evolution and darwinism and again, God bless you, open your mind to what is being said not what you already think you know.

                I am peaceful christian.

                1. TMMason profile image71
                  TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Exacrtly, Bro.

                  Science is not the know all they think it is, and these atheists try to make it.

            2. EphremHagos profile image60
              EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              In any case, the most difficult  atheists are the covert ones, o.k.a., Christians.

              Thanks be to God that real faith is only found outside all religions (including Christianity).

            3. EphremHagos profile image60
              EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Where "the LORD God Almighty and the Lamb" is present in person, "as he really is", under the terms and seal in the "new covenant", there is no need whatsoever for any religion (including Christianity).

              (Jer. 31: 31-34; Matt. 26: 26-29, 64; 27: 50-56; John 4: 21-26; 19: 30-37; Heb. 10: 19-25; Rev. 21; 22)

      2. EphremHagos profile image60
        EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        TMMason,

        Actually, the truth about Christ is necessarily more definable in personal EXPERIENCE or life than in any SCRIPTURES although they have a high degree of  complementarity. Far from destroying the veracity of the Bible, this gives deference to its very source of inspiration.

        That is why Jesus made the real distinction between the Scriptures and himself.  Like the Jews, Christians will pay an exceedingly high price if they fail to know the difference. (John 5: 39-40)

        1. TMMason profile image71
          TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I understand that perfectly, Ephrim.

          Ones personal relationship with both God and Christ is of utmost importance.

          I have not argued the scriptures have done anything to the veracity of the scriptures, except support them.

          And I am aware of the dangers of falling into the traditions of Men, over the Law of God.

          The Jews suffer even now from that flaw. They call the talmud the, "Holy Talmud", and place it in a place of higher honor and regard than the Torat... they place the traditions of Men over God.

          Yes... that would an error.

          That is why I argue so strongly against the tradition of Men known as the trinity.

          1. EphremHagos profile image60
            EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            If you are referring to personal relationship with God's revelation of himself in Christ's typical death on the cross, then we are in perfect agreement with the Scriptures at the expense of theology. AMEN & PTL.

      3. Jesus was a hippy profile image61
        Jesus was a hippyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You think that science cannot destroy the veracity of a book that says the entire world was flooded? Nor that man was created from dust and didnt evolve?

        How about stars falling from the sky like rain? That's a bit difficult since stars are bigger then the entire earth dont you think?

        How about living in a fish for 3 days?

        I dont think you know "science"

        1. TMMason profile image71
          TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Verse please... and "stars" represent angels in the bible.

          And that depends on what you think that fish actually was.

          You should really study what you speak of, before you speak.

          And my grasp on Science is just fine. It is you who do not grasp what is being said in the Bible.

          I think you should actually go and read it, grasp the context, and understand those men were discribing things they had no clue about, with the words and things they knew.

          1. Jesus was a hippy profile image61
            Jesus was a hippyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Verse for what?

            I should study? Stars means angels does it? So then why doesn't it say so and instead uses a different word that does NOT mean angel? You are simply making things up. The bible does not say angels. That makes you a liar.

            There was no global flood. You cannot live inside a fish and stars do not fall from the sky.

            I beg to differ that your "grasp" on science is fine.

            What dont I grasp? In your reply so far, all you have done is lie about what the bible says.

            1. TMMason profile image71
              TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You do not understand at all. Do you? No you don't

              What verse? Yes, what verses?

              The verse talking about the stars swept from the heavens is talking about the fall of a third of the Angels in Heaven.

              Simple.

              It is just that you do not have a clue about the Bible. As has been shown over and over in this thread and all the other bait threads you have posted.

              Stars there represent angels, but fallen angels. 

              The Bible itself gives you the understanding that these are angels. if you would read it you would not ask such questions, because you would know what it all means. the Bible is the only key to translate the prophecies and writings within its text.

              And as you find in Revelation 1, it says Jesus has seven stars in His hand and these seven stars are also angels. 

              The Bible tells you that these stars are angels, or messengers, to the churches. 

              In the prophecies, stars typically represent angels. 

              Yes there was a global flood... I point you to the KT boundry. Which would  require a shallow world wide ocean, or flood and lingering waters.

              See simple.

              And as I said... that depends on what you think that "fish" actualy was.

              1. Jesus was a hippy profile image61
                Jesus was a hippyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Would you care to explain WHAT it is that you claim I dont understand?

                I understand perfectly well that you are making things up. Stars does not mean angels. If the verse was talking about angels, it would have SAID "angels". The word for angels appears many times in other places so why not here?



                If you read the bible you wouldnt be asking me would you? Dont worry, I am used to conversing with christians who have no idea what the bible says.

                Isaiah 13:10, 34:4 there are many others



                yes, It should be.



                Who is the one asking for verses?



                Well that's just your own inference and NOT what the bible says.



                Nonsense. If that is what the bible MEANT then that is what it would SAY. But it doesnt, does it? That is what YOU say.



                And you dont think that science can disprove that? Hmmmmmmm



                So because of this, you see no scientific problem with a star, bigger than the entire earth and millions of lights years away, FALLING to earth even though it is nowhere near its gravitational pull?



                Jesus christ. Worldwide flood? If there was a worldwide flood ALL thvegetation would have DIED. What would the animals that were on the ark have eaten?

                Oh I just realised, you believe in the noahs ark story?

                Holy cow. You are a grown man right?

                I think I'll quit before you drag me down to your level and beat me with your idiocy.

                1. TMMason profile image71
                  TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  The Bible.

                  more simplicity you miss at.

                  And your answers are not actually coherent.

                  I asked which verse you are talking about... and you don't know. So I assume because you said, rained from the sky, that was the one.

                  Either way it doesn't matter.

                  If you would read the bible you would know what represents what.

                  1. Jesus was a hippy profile image61
                    Jesus was a hippyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Yet another statement that you dont bother explaining so I shall ignore it as I do all your other baseless assertions.



                    Funny that since I gave you two verses.



                    Interesting. Who says I never read the bible? In fact, reading the bible is the reason I DONT believe in christianity. Isn't that ironic?

    4. kess profile image59
      kessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The one who called himself the Christ prophesied negatively against all of Christianity and it is recorded in their book of scripture....

      Yet they are unable to discern this...

      How appropriate, deception is decieving its own self.

      1. rbe0 profile image61
        rbe0posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        It is difficult indeed for most people to obtain an objective view of their own reality.

        I agree it is sad that this happens...

      2. EphremHagos profile image60
        EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        What Christ negatively prophesied, in words and deeds, is not against Christianity in particular but  all religions in general!

        (John 2: 13-22; 4: 21-26; 12: 32-33; 19: 30-37)

        1. rbe0 profile image61
          rbe0posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Sorry ephram, my bible fell out of my car window while i was driving 80 miles an hour on the freeway. I was unable to recover it.

          Can you please stop leaving cryptic messages in the form of nonsensical numbers??

          1. brotheryochanan profile image60
            brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Those are scriptures from the book that fell out your window when you should have been paying attention to driving your car, but gotta admire the zeal.

            gospel of john chapter 2 verses 13-22 and  chapter 4 verses 21-26
            you see the pattern
            hope this helped

        2. kess profile image59
          kessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Sorry That one in particular is only for christianity....

    5. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I don't believe you'll find your answer here but good luck lol

    6. profile image69
      paarsurreyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No , it does not.

    7. EphremHagos profile image60
      EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Are there any sources confirming "The truth about Christ" based on his Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical death on the cross?

    8. Sagittarius 2012 profile image61
      Sagittarius 2012posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No, it doesn't.

      #1 - the name. 
       The name of Christ in His native Aramaic language was Isa, which translates in to Hebrew Esau, not Jesus. 
      There is only one man in the Bible with the same name. In OT Esau is the first born and beloved son of Isaac (Gen. 25). If you look at the personality of Esau from the OT, you will find that it reflect the image of Christ.

      #2 - the  nationality. 
      Christ  was not a Jew, in fact He was opponent of Jews, and you can see it in His every dialog with the Jews. 

      Christ and his disciples (except Judas) were all Galileeans, and Galilee was separated from Judea by Samaria.

      After His mother Mary, Christ was descendent of Esau/Edom, so He was Idumean (possibly Minaean), but not a Jew. After Israelites were deported by Assyrians and Jews were taken to Babylon, the Edomites have moved from Seir to the empty territories. During the Machabees revolts  Idumeans were forced by Jews to accept Judaism, but they have never integrated with the Jews. 
      Idumeans became known as Essenes (decendents  of Esau) and were the Proto - Chrisians of Christ's time.

      One of the Idumeans was Herod the Grate, the best king Jews ever had. The historical Joseph, Christ's stepfather, was one of Herod's nephews.

      #3 - the year Christ was born.
      We are living in the year AD 2012, (AD = Anno Domini - the year of the Lord), or more commonly known 2012 CE (Christ Era). This date tells us that from the time when Christ was born our era is counted.
      However, to justify false accusation of Herod the Grate, of  massacre of innocent,  the Judeo-Christians are ready to move the year when Christ was born by 6 - 7 years. The reason for it is, that we know now from the history, that Herod the Grate died 5 years before Christ was born, and had nothing to do with Christ. The false accusation by Matthew evangelist is contrary to the Gospel of Luke, in which Luke states, that after his birth, Christ was not taken to Egypt but the Herod's the Grate Temple in Jerusalem.


      And the "Truth" goes on and on, and there is so much more of it.

      1. aka-dj profile image80
        aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Herod the GRATE! lol
        Love that! lol  lol lol

        1. Disappearinghead profile image89
          Disappearingheadposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Did he invent the fireplace?

          1. Sagittarius 2012 profile image61
            Sagittarius 2012posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            There is no doubt that Herod was great inventor, and there was something about fireplace at his bath house in Jericho; check the National Geographic or his biography.

        2. Sagittarius 2012 profile image61
          Sagittarius 2012posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Aka-dj, I hope you enjoyed reading it and sorry for my typo (you will find many of them in my texts).
           BTW. Herod never called himself grate niter great.
          Great was added to him after his death in appreciation what he have done for Judea and the Jews.

          If you have any interest in history, I would recommend biography of Herod the Great by Michael Grant, or article about Herod in National Geographic. 
          I have written something about Herod before, so I will just paste it here for you:

          "There is a big problem is accusation of Herod the Great that he had order the Massacre of Innocent boys in Bethlehem. 
          Modern biographers of Herod, like historian Michael Grant, doubt that the  event took place.

          Herod the Great was the best king Jews ever had.

          HEROD THE GREAT:

          AN ARABIC KING OF ISRAEL

          http://www.maat.it/livello2-i/erode-i.htm

          http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/ … eller-text


          Herod the Great, who reigned over Palestine from 37 to 4 B.C., is famous as he was accused to have achieved the presumed massacre of the innocents. 
          The only prosecutor was the evangelist Mattew (2.1-18).

          Even ignoring the objections referring to the year and the place of birth of Jesus, we can assert that:

          - Herod had not the authority to sentence death without 
          the approval of the Sanhedrim and in some important cases without the explicit approval of the Romans.

          - If Herod had issued such an order Rome would have stopped him, if not for humaneness, certainly to avoid breaches of the peace.

          Herod was a great king, enemy of the Hebraic religious integralisme, continuator of the work of Alexander the Great: a common culture for the West and the East without ethnic or religious distinctions. 

          For this vision of him and for his Arabic origin he was slandered by the Jewish tradition that transformed him
          in a bloodthirsty monster. 

          The origin of Herod.

          Herod the Great was born about 73 B.C. by Idumean (Edomite) father, Antipater, and by an Arabic mother, Cyprus, indigenous of Petra, capital of the Nabataeans. 

          Idumaea, a region between the reign of Judah and the desert of the Negev, had been conquered by the Jews and its inhabitants were converted forcedly to Judaism at the times of the Hansomean king John Hyrcanus I.

          "Hyrcanus initiated a military campaign against the Idumeans in the Negev near Eilat. During this campaign Hyrcanus  conquered Adora, Marisa and other Idumean towns (Ant.13.257). 
          Hyrcanus then instituted forced conversions on the Idumeans."


          Herod had three brothers (Joseph, Fasael, Ferora) and one sister, Salomè.


          Antipater: the father of Herod.

          Herod's father, an Idumean nobleman, was councellor 
          of the Jewish king Hyrcanus II. 
          Hyrcanus, of the dynasty of the Hasmonean, had come to the throne in 67 B.C. at the death of his mother Alessandra. 

          The younger brother Aristobulos had begun a civil war 
          in order to get hold of the throne, succeeding to drive 
          Hyrcanus out of Jerusalem. 
          Then Hyrcanus had asked help to Arab Nabateans 
          and to Pompeius the Great....

          In the 63 B.C. Pompeius freed Jerusalem, gave the throne back to Hyrcanus and sent to Rome Aristobulos and his sons.

          Antipater, who at the time of Queen Alexandra had 
          been governor of the native Idumaea, immediately
          took the part of Hyrcanus and it helped him in his 
          relationship with the Romans. 
          He was friend of Pompeius and at the right moment 
          of Cesar, who named him epitropos of the Judah, 
          a title not official but that recognized to the Idumean 
          one an authority deriving from the Romans.


          The beginnings of Herod

          In 47 B.C. Antipater named Herod the Idumean governor of the Galilee and Fasael, his brother, governor of Jerusalem.

          Herod manifested himself decided in fighting marauders 
          and put Ezechia and his band to death. 
          The Sanhedrim, dominated by the conservatives, 
          did not appreciate of having been supplanted in death 
          sentences and put Herod under accusation . 

          Sextus Caesar, the Roman governor of Syria, defended Herod and entrusted him with an important task, perhaps he named him governor of Coele Syria and Samaria.

          The Roman civil war

          In 44 B.C. Julius Caesar was killed and Cassius Longinus, one of the conspirators, went to Syria in order to collect troops and money for the civil war.

          Antipater and Herod sided with Cassius. 
          Herod saw his powers widened and had at his disposal a fleet and an army.

          In 43 B.C. Antipater was killed by Malico, exponent of the conservative antiroman opposition. 
          Malico was killed at Tyre by a group of Romans, perhaps pushed by Herod.

          Herod and Marc Antony

          In the autumn of 42 B.C. Antony and Octavianus defeated Brutus and Cassius, who killed themselves. 
          Herod, really skillful, ran to Ephesus to the winner and 
          obtained his friendship, in addition to the title of tetrarch, 
          that was given to Fasael too.

          Antigonus and the Parthians

          In the 40 B.C. Antigonus, the son of Aristobulos, younger brother of Hyrcanus, formed an alliance with the Parthians who invaded Palestine and removed Hyrcanus from the throne, to whom ears were cut. Hyrcanus, due to his impairment could have claimed the throne no more. Fasael was captured and killed while he was dealing with the Parthians.

          Herod escaped in the fortress of Masada. Then, entrusted the defense to his brother Joseph, he went towards Petra, but the king of the Nabateans Malco did not want to receive him. Then Herod went to Egypt at Cleopatra, then to Rhodes, to Brindisi and finally to Rome at Antony.

          King without reign

          At the end of 40 B.C. Antony convinced the Roman Senate to name Herod king of Judah, allied and friend of the Roman people.

          In the spring of 39 B.C. Herod disembarked at Ptolemais (Acco, Acri) on the coast of high Galilee. It gathered an army, freed his brother Joseph besieged at Masada and began the fight against Antigonus.

          In February of 37 B.C. he began to besiege Jerusalem. After five months, with the aid of the Roman troops of Sosius, he entered the city. The Romans took Antigonus, who later was made killed by Antony. Herod had his reign.

          The land to the peasants

          To the peasants without land Herod gave in rent immense portions of his lands with the obligation to cultivate them. He reclaimed lands, made canalizations for the irrigation, helped the constitution of model farms . He yielded cleared lands to the peasants who had lost their land. Herod's agricultural politics had great succes and Octavianus gave to Herod other regions outside his reign.

          Expropriation of the noble ones

          Herod found lands and the resources in order to value them, expropriating the aristocracy that had supported Antigonus and taking control of all the assets of the Asmoneans.

          Herod in transactions

          Herod earned a lot renting from Cleopatra cultivations of balsamina, used for the preparation of ointments, incenses, cosmetics.

          He exploited the deposits of asphalt of the Dead Sea.

          He carried out, like his father, activity of banking type lend money to principles and kings.

          In 12 B.C. he rented from Augustus the copper mines of Cyprus.

          The constructions

          Herod built palaces and castles of Jerusalem, Jericho, Sepphoris in Galilee, Bethrampta in Perea, of Ascalona, the Herodion, the fortress of Hyrcania. he made many works in order to render the fortress of Masada safer.

          He founded the city of Antipatrides, today Ras el' ain, and of Fasaelides, today Chirbet fas'il.

          He constructed sports centers, theatres, aqueducts, roads, ports.

          In 27 B.C. he began the reconstruction of Samaria, called Sebaste.

          In 22 B.C. he began the reconstruction of Caesarea and of its port, inaugurated in 9 B.C.

          Towards 20 B.C. it began the reconstruction of the temple of Jerusalem, inaugurated in 10 B.C. ( now days called Salomon's Temple)


          The public order

          He fought against the marauders of the desert. He exterminated the gangs that wandered about in the frontier regions.

          Friend of Octavianus

          Antony was defeated by Octavianus at Actium the 2 September of 31 B.C. Herod readily helped the governor of Syria engaged in repressing a putsch of followers of Antony. Then he went to Rhodes in order to meet Octavianus and to put himself at his service. He obtained the confirmation of his reign and had back the lands that Cleopatra had taken. Moreover Samaria , the cities of Ippo and Gadara, and some coastal cities were entrusted to him. The guard of Cleopatra, constituted by 400 Galatians, became his personal guard.

          Herod changed the name of Samaria in Sebaste, sebastòs in Greek means Augustus.

          Shows

          Making to horrify the conservative Hebrew he promoted athletic shows and circensian games. Beginning from 28 B.C. he introduced the quinquennial games, like the Olympic games.

          Protector of Hebrews of Diaspora

          The Hebrews of the Ionia had demanded to the Romans of being exempted from the military service, of considering to all the effects festive the saturday and therefore not to be cited in judgment in such day, of not being forced to assume expensive public office, etc. Herod in 14 B.C. addressed his friend Agrippa and succeeded to obtain what the Hebrews asked.

          Difficult relationships with the Pharisees

          In 6 B.C. he proceeded against the Pharisees who had vaticinated that, with the birth of the Messiah, the reign of Herod would come to the end.

          In 4 B.C. some young people, pushed by the Pharisees, pulled down the Eagle that Herod had placed at the entrance of the temple of Jerusalem. He immediately ordered that they were arrested and condemned.

          Death of Herod

          At the end of March or at the first days of April of 4 B.C. Herod died after a long disease, and it was years before Christ was born."

          1. aka-dj profile image80
            aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            You should put this into a Hub.
            Way too long for a forum post.

          2. brotheryochanan profile image60
            brotheryochananposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            There were several herods. the herod that is talked about as killing the innocents is the herod after the one you described.

            1. Jesus was a hippy profile image61
              Jesus was a hippyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Dont you ever think sometimes, just sometimes, that it would be easier if you didnt believe in all this and you could spend your time not debating about people from thousands of years ago?

              1. brotheryochanan profile image60
                brotheryochananposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                no i don't ever think that

                1. Jesus was a hippy profile image61
                  Jesus was a hippyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Wow really? My mum used to be a nun.

            2. Sagittarius 2012 profile image61
              Sagittarius 2012posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I have hear this before from people who believe that a lie repeated fifty times becomes truth, however, the truth is that it is still lie. 

              Read the book of Michel Grant, the famous historian and biographer of great leaders of early C.E. era, or article in National Geographic  Magazine - Link provided in my comment.

    9. Chris Neal profile image85
      Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The Bible speaks the truth about Christ.

      Hopefully we Christians do a good job too, but not always.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        You have certainly convinced me it is nonsense. wink

  2. EphremHagos profile image60
    EphremHagosposted 5 years ago

    rbe0,

    "The truth about Christ" is a subject NOT for small talk but hard talk. Be prepared!

    1. brotheryochanan profile image60
      brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know of any christians when quoted the word of God thinks it is hate speech lol or redundant. Some people must be in the wrong forum.

    2. rbe0 profile image61
      rbe0posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      http://s3.hubimg.com/u/5940242_f248.jpg

  3. pisean282311 profile image57
    pisean282311posted 5 years ago

    to tell truth one must know truth...what we claim as truth might be just another story...dont blame Christianity for it...they believe that they know truth but that applies to most humans...

  4. AshtonFirefly profile image82
    AshtonFireflyposted 5 years ago

    To ask if Christianity speaks the truth about Christ is to assume that "Christianity" is a unified concept. It is not. There are a lot of "branches" of Christianity which teach different things about the person of Christ.
      And that is exactly the point: what IS the truth about Christ? Who knows what is the real truth of Christ when we weren't there and even those who were there, disagreed on it? I find it very difficult to imagine that we, 2,000 years later, can give accurate descriptions of a man who, 2,000 years ago, (according to the Bible itself) caused even the people around him to be confused about who he was, and what he was about. They didn't have miraculously well developed ways of documenting history in those days. If they did, we might know more...

    1. TMMason profile image71
      TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The Apostles did not dis-aree as to who and what Christ was.

      A man, the Son of The living God.

      The errors many hold dear today, attempted to creep in and distort it during the life of the Apostles, and after their deaths and the deaths of thier followers, the truth was crushed by the heretics.

      The bible does not contradict itself, or hide what and who Christ was. The doctrines of man though, conradict the Bible, and skew who and what Christ was.

      1. AshtonFirefly profile image82
        AshtonFireflyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Many say the Bible does contradict itself. Atheists, Christians, anybody who has studied it extensively. It depends on who you ask, I guess. Which brings us back to the same problem...

        Even the concept of accepting all of the BIble as an infallible book of Christianity, is debated, even in "Christian" circles.

        1. EphremHagos profile image60
          EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          That is why "the written law brings death, but the Spirit gives life." (2 Cor.6)

          Since Christ's perfect, diacritical and timeless death on the cross, we have the "new covenant" of the Spirit superseding written law of the "old covenant".

          1. EphremHagos profile image60
            EphremHagosposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Regret typo: 2 Cor. 3:6

  5. Philanthropy2012 profile image90
    Philanthropy2012posted 5 years ago

    I would be careful, he has a whole arsenal of pseudo-scientists (whose names and sources he refuses to reveal) that will prove you wrong. And if they can't, well he'll just say "OH only scientists that think like you are credible!"

    1. TMMason profile image71
      TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I have posted link on tons of posts.

      So get real.

      Of course the only response i get form you atheists is, oh those scientists do not understand or know.

      What a load of BS.

  6. MickeySr profile image86
    MickeySrposted 5 years ago

    It depends on what you mean by "Christianity". There is a lot that is labeled 'Christian' today that is very far from authentic, histrionic Christianity. Fortunately, Christianity comes from an authoritative source, it is based on what the Bible presents as the truth and we have good, accurate translations today of what those earliest Christians had . . . we also have extant many, many copies of personal letters, commentaries, sermons, etc, from Christians from the very beginning and up till now. Many like to imagine that the Bible has been altered through the years, and many like to imagine that it was all made-up in the first place (by Constantine) to control others - but while this is a popular assertion, it comes out of shallow pretending and is easily demonstrated to be a silly and contrived reading of the historic record.

    We have letters written by associates of John and Peter, historic figures not Bible characters (men like Ignatius, Polycarp, & Irenaeus, etc) whose writings contain references to the same accounts the Bible sets forth regarding Jesus' teaching, arrest, execution, etc, and they quote so much of the Bible that they had at that time that we can construct, just from their writings, the entire New Testament and nearly all of the Old Testament as it was at the very beginning - and it is just the same Bible we have today.

    So, while many like to imagine, with little or no genuine investigation at all, that it's foolishness to think Christianity is what it presents itself to be and that it is no different at all from any other religion (man merely trying to explain his world or conniving religious despots trying to control the masses, etc), that fact is that the historic record evidences just the opposite. a Time magazine cover on 'Was There Really A Jesus?' or a History Channel show called 'The History Of Christianity', etc, or just assuming what you heard a bit of somewhere is true and surmising the rest, etc, is not honest, authentic research.

    So, I would say that while much that is cataloged as 'Christianity' today does not "speak the truth about Christ", the Bible and the historic record do indeed "speak the truth about Christ" - Christianity is the truth, it's just that so few have a sound apprehension of what authentic Christianity is.

    1. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks Mickey, nice post as always

      1. mischeviousme profile image60
        mischeviousmeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        But also at the same time, is it not a sujective venture, religion? It is all the same, it has just been said in so many ways that people seem to have forgotten what the words mean. I can tell you something and it is up to you to believe me or not. This is the same the world over, we are creatures of habbit and it is easy for us to lose the true meaning of anything over time, then it just becomes "going through the motions", The writing meant something then, now it means something completely different.

           Translations, pure doccuments, relics, whatever, they are all archetypes and mean nothing to me. The beauty of it, is that it means something to someone and I accept it as it is.

        1. profile image0
          kimberlyslyricsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Dude, chill, I have no certain belief I was just commending Mickey for his knowledge and spending the time sharing it.  May you have a good year smile

 
working