Nat Geo running non-religious Jesus Documentaries..must see stuff

[Southern Gent]

John 11:50
KFV = Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

BV = "Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish."

NIN = You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish."

NLT = You don't realize that it's better for you that one man should die for the people than for the whole nation to be destroyed."

NAS = nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish."

GWB = You haven't even considered this: It is better for one man to die for the people than for the whole nation to be destroyed."

NLB = You do not see that it is in your interest for one man to be put to death for the people, so that all the nation may not come to destruction.

WEB = nor do you consider that it is advantageous for us that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish

Which one are you saying was the one God wrote?

and No I am not saying something like this was thought of in relation to the issue being described.

I am talking about Matthew 27:25 and you know I am. Dont try to change the subject. That line was added decades after Matthew was written. The whole washing his hands thing, the trying to give Jesus up as a passover forgiveness thing...all false. The tradition of freeing a criminal on passover is all false. The Roman tradition had nothing to do with passover and only removed leg irons from criminals. [ Barabbas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ] If you care to read actual history. The criminal the Jews wanted to free could have actually have been Jesus....read the wiki.

Sorry I didn't proof read....hiding behind my ignorance doesn't forgive yours. I love God enough to stay educated on the latest findings and investigations. I also stay abreast of the legal fight to get Christian scrolls released from private collectors and proper NON-BIAS translation of old text.

Very good. Perhaps you'll find something in the old manuscript about being condescending to your sisters & brothers. The Bible is full of changes, omissions & additions. The very verse that says "don't add to or take away" is missing from older manuscripts
and some translations make that known if one looks at the Bible notation and keys. The Apostles seem pretty sure it was Israel who killed Jesus.
Acts 2:36
Act 4:10
Acts 5:28

 

[blondeambition3]

The Apostles seem pretty sure it was Israel who killed Jesus.
Acts 2:36
Act 4:10
Acts 5:28

I heard 'Rome' did..... Read this SG and get back with us on your response;
Question 16.5: Did the Jews kill Jesus?

 

[Southern Gent]

I heard 'Rome' did..... Read this SG and get back with us on your response;
Question 16.5: Did the Jews kill Jesus?

There were no less than 13 "other" Messiahs executed as well. It's all semantics...Jews killed Him..Rome killed Him..
You want to know who REALLY killed Him?

I DID!!!
He died because of me.

actually God killed Him too...probably more at fault than anyone else. Jesus was born for the sole purpose of death. We are all to blame.

 

[iJax]

Very good. Perhaps you'll find something in the old manuscript about being condescending to your sisters & brothers. The Bible is full of changes, omissions & additions. The very verse that says "don't add to or take away" is missing from older manuscripts
and some translations make that known if one looks at the Bible notation and keys. The Apostles seem pretty sure it was Israel who killed Jesus.
Acts 2:36
Act 4:10
Acts 5:28

Yes SG, I got upset, because once again, people jump to attack and not simply stay out. I jumped into a thread not realizing what it was, and deleted my post once I realized i was out of line. I have since read about a dozen threads I have no business in and IGNORE them. Seems I am the only one here that does that.

yes I am condescending, because frankly, I do act in a more Christian way then several members here. I offer information, and view points in a non-attacking manor.

That type of friendly behavior is not given to me. I have yet to see any other member remove, edit or apologize for attacking someone elses ideas and beliefs within the Christian value system.

I am glad you admit the Bible has many changes in it. Can I ask you why then did you not defend me in this thread and publicly state many of the programs actually stem from TRUTH in history and expose the falseness in the Bible?

If you do believe in the word of God, shouldn't all be told what in the Holy Bible is NOT the word of God?

It is only in the last 70 years that Christians gained the power, knowledge and information to rid the holy word of these falsehoods. Anyone who stands in the way of the purging of these false statements can be thought of as acting in defense of evil.

 

[Southern Gent]

I am glad you admit the Bible has many changes in it. Can I ask you why then did you not defend me in this thread and publicly state many of the programs actually stem from TRUTH in history and expose the falseness in the Bible?

If you do believe in the word of God, shouldn't all be told what in the Holy Bible is NOT the word of God?

It is only in the last 70 years that Christians gained the power, knowledge and information to rid the holy word of these falsehoods. Anyone who stands in the way of the purging of these false statements can be thought of as acting in defense of evil.

I can't defend nor condemn anything you say/said because most of it trickles down in riddles and I'm not a mind reader. Many would probably "understand" better if things were spoken in a manner they could understand. Not that they are stupid or ignorant but it may be it is not a field of study for them. Just because someone doesn't get it doesn't mean they won't get it if given the opportunity. People have a "right" to know but that doesn't mean they want to know. Many here are very happy to know that God loves them and they are His child. Many begin to be upset when something "seems" to challenge that whether it really does or not. It would offend/upset a great many to know the RCC began as a pagan cult before the time of Christ. If they are secure in their relationship with God, what would it accomplish?
The truth goes far beyond semantics. Did Rome kill Jesus? Of course they did...they were the instrument God chose. Did the Jews kill Jesus? Some did...religion and politics make strange bedfellows. The RCC has altered history, Mary Magdalene is a prime example. .....? Not hardly. Preacher, teacher & apostle? Good chance. I know history has been altered in some ways.
I'm not interested in rewriting it or throwing the baby out with the bath water.
I would not argue concerning changes. I was offended by the way it was presented as if no one could understand it. If I misunderstood or took it the wrong way, please accept my apologies.