Jesus Christ, was he sent for all mankind?

[peaceful soul]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus clearly says that he came for ISRAEL and told his followers to not go among the GENTILES: how much more clear must these verses be? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]You are not looking at the entirety of text. You are focusing on a narrow segment and not acknowledging the rest that counters your claim. As I mentioned previously, events A (going to Israel) and event B (going to all nations) are mutually exclusive events. There are plausible explanations for Jesus only mentioning event A first (Luke 24 explains) and not mentioning (B); but that does not exclude event B from happening. These two events would not be contradictory. The question that you should be pondering is that if Jesus only meant event A to happen, then why did He violate His own saying by going to minister to the Samaritans with His disciples [FONT=&quot](John 4:1-42)? Additionally, why did He drive the demon out of the other Samaritan’s daughter and minister to her? There were other incidents where He ministered to Samaritans. Why didn’t he refuse them if His ministry was only to the Israel? There is no scripture that criticizes these events as being against His decree.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

Historical evidence from 1st century Palestine support Aramaic among the Jews: did you want me to show you?

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Yes, you can show me; but I really don't want to speculate. If Jesus used Aramaic, do you have the passage in Aramaic? If not, it is a moot point.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

Strong’s lexicon is one of the most bias sources.

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]You might want to use an online Greek lexicon that actually cross references the uses of ‘ethnos’ with other Greek sources. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The main definition of ‘ethnos’ is people living together, particular tribes, nation, and people.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Are we to conclude that only Israel was divided into tribes? All tribes would be all nations. This would not be specific to Israel.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We really don't need Strong's concordance to see that Jesus said to go beyond Israel, although the text states Jerusalem. It is neither logical nor rational to believe that Jesus' disciples went against His commands when they, along with Jesus, are reported ministering to non-Israelites. Add to this the fact that even the supposedly "ghost" of Jesus did not prevent them from their actions in Acts. Since you mentioned it, I will look at other concordances in the future. I think that Strong's should know what the context of the word is in relation to the Bible.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jerusalem is not Israel; so starting from Jerusalem does not automatically mean Israel: do you know the difference between Judah and the other tribes aka nations?

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If I understand you point, all nations refers to all of the 12 tribes. As I previously pointed out, then Jesus would have been more correct to say to the rest of the lost house of Israel. If you allow for the historicity of the post-resurrected Jesus, then there is no problem with my position. If you simply don’t look at the big picture, then you will be stuck in the loop of not seeing any peripherals. Studying this text requires that you subject yourself to the rest of the text to help to give you a more complete picture. If you see part of text (A) that seemingly contradicts another (B), then you have to try to resolve the two parts. There is ample text that you unfortunately reject due to your personal bias that would solve the problem for you. There are two mutually exclusive events at work.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

I am asking for historical evidence; if you do not understand the difference between historical evidence and mythos then we should stop now. A character speaking to people after his death is NOT HISTORICAL!

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In this case, it is historical. Why? Because it is the same person that you accepted as historical before He died and resurrected. The text acknowledges that this person who is giving the directives is a supernatural being that is considered God, who is not bound by human limitations of death. From a purely textual POV, this character’s historicity does not change as a result. Your disbelief of this does not impact that fact that the text testifies to this as being fact. It is your personal bias that is prohibiting you from testifying to what the text says. It is not the responsibility of a scholar or any other person of academia who is trying to understand a text to determine the validity of the text in order to comprehend what the text is actually saying. Whether the text is authentic is another issue. Your goal should be to testify to what is written. Its truthfulness can be contested in another thread.[/FONT]

 

[peaceful soul]

I wanted historical evidence not mythos from a ghost.

Your opinion is not the issue here. You are supposed to be concerned with what the totality of text testifies to. We are not questioning the veracity of the text itself. Please remove your personal biases so that we can hopefully reach a reasonable conclusion.

See post above.

 

[GenemZ]

I believe the Acts is a false gospel.

That settles it. You are a locked shut mind. Why even debate with you?

Yet, Jesus died for that sin, too.

All the Muslims who turn to Christ and are saved, will leave you standing before the Lord not having any excuse.... if you remain a locked shut mind.

Muslims do find salvation in Christ, and are even willing to be murdered for it by Muslims with lock shut minds. No one will perish who the Father knows will believe in Jesus Christ.

In Christ, GeneZ
​

 

[Rut]

I believe the Acts is a false gospel.

Why is it a false gospel?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by anatolian
I believe the Acts is a false gospel.

How dare you say that about Jesus and our "Wood of Life"!!

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Acts 13:29 and when they did complete all the things written about Him, having taken [him] down from the tree/wood/xulou <3586>, they laid Him in a tomb;

Revelation 22:14 `Happy are those doing His commands that the authority shall be theirs unto the tree/wood/xulon <3586> of the Life, and by the gates they may enter into the city;

Strong's Number G3586 matches the Greek &#958;&#8059;&#955;&#959;&#957; (xylon).

 

[GenemZ]

How dare you say that about Jesus and our "Wood of Life"!!

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Acts 13:29 and when they did complete all the things written about Him, having taken [him] down from the tree/wood/xulou <3586>, they laid Him in a tomb;

Revelation 22:14 `Happy are those doing His commands that the authority shall be theirs unto the tree/wood/xulon <3586> of the Life, and by the gates they may enter into the city;

Strong's Number G3586 matches the Greek &#958;&#8059;&#955;&#959;&#957; (xylon).

I am a Christian for many years, and I can't make sense of how what you said connects with what you quoted from another. Could you explain why you said what you did in response to what you quoted???

It makes no sense.

In Christ, GeneZ
​

 

[peepnklown]

Please remove your personal biases so that we can hopefully reach a reasonable conclusion.

I am asking for historically reliable evidence and I am being unreasonable? A texts that quotes a character after their death is not historically reliable evidence; this is not an opinion on the matter.
I will say this once more: if you cannot understand the difference between historically reliable evidence and mythos then please leave the discussion now.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by anatolian I believe the Acts is a false gospel.

Bump.............

 

[français]

If someone thinks our Bible is corrupt, then they have no right to debate our Bible. And unless they have "proof" as to WHERE the Bible has been changed, and to WHAT DEGREE, they really have no business even making the claim that the Bible is!

Someone can not make such claims without first showing the proof. And this is why I roll my eyes at muslims, because they have no proof. They ignore the fact that more Biblical manuscripts have been preserved then any other book in the world. The closest book behind the Bible doesn't even have 10% of the number of manuscripts as the Bible has!!!

But, I suppose that people will adhere to whatever heretical beliefs they wish, so long as it satisfies their indulgences.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

bump................

Daniel 12:1 `And at that time stand up doth Michael, the great head, who is standing up for the sons of thy people, and there hath been a time of distress, such as hath not been since there hath been a nation till that time, and at that time do thy people escape, every one who is found written in the Book.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hello.We muslims believe he was sent to the sons of Israel not for all mankind.This doesnt mean the one who follows Him in real does a wrong job, but this is God's plan for He sent Muhammed-aleyhissalam-to all mankind.Which proofs do christians have to claim that Jesus was sent to entire humanity and not only to the israelites?

So do Muslims believe Jesus was just sent JUST to Israel, and what about Prophets of other religions including the Baha'is Prophet after Muhammad? Peace.

 

[GenemZ]

So do Muslims believe Jesus was just sent JUST to Israel, and what about Prophets of other religions including the Baha'is Prophet after Muhammad? Peace.

Jesus had an incremental plan to follow.

In the beginning it was only to Israel.

Yet? After he finished his work on the Cross and the resurrection had been accomplished? He told his disciples now to go into all the world.

To think Christianity was only to be for the Jews is a silly argument. Its just taking some passage out of the context of the plan of God, and imposing one's own distortion upon it.

Why are we even arguing on this point? Its an obvious distortion of the over-all-plan for salvation for all men.

Grace and peace, GeneZ​

 

[Smileyill]

I am asking for historically reliable evidence and I am being unreasonable? A texts that quotes a character after their death is not historically reliable evidence; this is not an opinion on the matter.
I will say this once more: if you cannot understand the difference between historically reliable evidence and mythos then please leave the discussion now.

How absurd. Eyewitness evidence doesn't count now? Especially when they die instead of recanting, a very strong indicator of reliability. They saw Him die and rise again. If He didn't rise again, why die for that lie? Simple, it's no lie.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Jesus had an incremental plan to follow.

In the beginning it was only to Israel.

Yet? After he finished his work on the Cross and the resurrection had been accomplished? He told his disciples now to go into all the world.

To think Christianity was only to be for the Jews is a silly argument. Its just taking some passage out of the context of the plan of God, and imposing one's own distortion upon it.

Why are we even arguing on this point? Its an obvious distortion of the over-all-plan for salvation for all men.

Grace and peace, GeneZ​

Don't know why. The Muslims are the one that brought it up.

 

[anatolian]

So do Muslims believe Jesus was just sent JUST to Israel, and what about Prophets of other religions including the Baha'is Prophet after Muhammad? Peace.

No more prophet after Rasullullah.He guides us to every truth...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

No more prophet after Rasullullah.He guides us to every truth...

Okie Dokie.

http://www.christianforums.com/t588...n-of-christ-all-religions-please-respond.html

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hello.We muslims believe he was sent to the sons of Israel not for all mankind.This doesnt mean the one who follows Him in real does a wrong job but this is God's plan for He sent Muhammed-aleyhissalam-to all mankind.Which proofs do christians have to claim that Jesus was sent to entire humanity and not only to the israelites?

This is about the most absurb post I have seen yet on CF concerning Jesus.
But for some reason, the Apostle Paul is left out of the picture and is this some muslim conspiracy to elevate Muhammad over Paul? Me wonders.

 

[GenemZ]

Well, because the Quran is a confirmation of that which is true.

Why is the Quran true?

IC, GeneZ
​

 

[Raul7]

Why is the Quran true?

IC, GeneZ
​

Because it has been preserved in the same shape and form since the day it was revealed. In addition, it provides mankind with a complete and an uncontradictory 'how to' guide on how to lead a successful life both in this world and the next.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Because it has been preserved in the same shape and form since the day it was revealed. In addition, it provides mankind with a complete and an uncontradictory 'how to' guide on how to lead a successful life both in this world and the next.

So what is any different about it than the Bible.

Matthew 24:27 for as the lightning doth come forth from the east, and doth appear unto the west, so shall be also the presence/parousia <3952> of the Son of Man;

2 Peter 3:12 waiting for and hasting to the presence/parousian <3952> of the day of the God/qeou <2316>, by which the heavens, being on fire, shall be dissolved, and the elements with burning heat shall melt;