Video: Jesus Was NOT Jewish – The Origin the Church Hid for 2,000 Years | Spinoza
More conspiratorial nonsense:
Jesus was Jewish. It is the foundation of Western faith, repeated for two millennia. But what if the face we worship is a mask? In the 17th century, the exiled philosopher Baruch Spinoza uncovered a historical thread that threatens to unravel this accepted narrative. In this documentary, we journey back to the first century to expose the deep ethnic divide between the “pure” Judeans of the south and the “mixed” Galileans of the north. We analyze the contradictions in the biblical genealogies, the linguistic evidence of Jesus’s foreign accent, and the archaeological secrets buried in the soil of Nazareth. Was the story of the “Jewish King” a strategic fabrication by the early Church to fulfill ancient prophecies? And if Jesus was actually a Galilean of mixed heritage—a “Universal Man”—does that finally heal the wounds of centuries of religious conflict?
I haven’t heard the claim in years, probably the last time was on reading Susannah Heschel’s ** you do not have permission to see this link **.
In case you’re wondering what one might find on the ** you do not have permission to see this link **
SPINOZA REVEALED THE SECRET RITUAL THAT MAKES JEWS CONTROL 40% OF GLOBAL WEALTH
SPINOZA PROVED: JESUS Had 12 CHILDREN – Vatican DNA Test Confirms 127 Alive Today
SPINOZA: The TRUE FATHER of JESUS Was Roman Senator MARCUS – Mary’s Confession Found in 367 AD
THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS WAS A STAGED EVENT: SPINOZA UNCOVERED THE HIDDEN EVIDENCE
VATICAN HIDES 6,347 BLACK MAGIC BOOKS IN ROOM 666 – Spinoza Exposed the Forbidden Grimoires
Steefen, careful my friend. I’m absolutely not accusing you of anything. I assume you are simply unaware of the history of the idea that Jesus was not really Jewish. It slides uncomfortably close to certain flavors of antisemitism. Perhaps you should investigate the life and career of German Protestant theologian Albrecht Benjamin Ritschl (1822-1889), who popularized this idea in his writings.
Spinoza did not deny the existence of Jesus. Spinoza interpreted Jesus and his ideas through an Enlightenment lens. Jesus was an exemplary moral teacher. Like Jefferson, Spinoza allegorized away the supernatural narratives. The Logos became the center of Human Reason. Why don’t you read some Spinoza? A great genius who had some interesting things to say. (In my opinion his fundamental insight was that the proper response to the mysteries of the universe is not worship, but curiosity.)
The problem with this video is that it combines denialism with utter credulity. Like I told Jarek, if you’re going to be a skeptic, for god’s sake be a skeptic! Don’t deny the obvious only to replace it with some credulous fantasy.
The culture and demographics of Judea was different from Israel.
The culture and demographics of the south was different from the north.
BJH, are you denying that?
Stephen, are you denying that?
= = =
Stephen
Spinoza did not deny the existence of Jesus.
YouTube Channel’s Replies
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
The culture and demographics of Judea was different from Israel.
The culture and demographics of the south was different from the north.
BJH, are you denying that?
Of course I’m not denying the culture and demographics of one region is going to be different than another. Why would I?
Are you denying Jesus was Jewish? On what basis? Are there any scholars who think this was the case?
Has this been a long-time belief of yours? Or is it one you came to upon seeing that YouTube video you shared from a channel that believes Jews control 40% of global wealth?
Do you believe Jews control 40% of global wealth?
Steefen said:
Stephen
Spinoza did not deny the existence of Jesus.YouTube Channel’s Replies
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Now, here I thought Post 4 would have put into doubt the veracity of any videos posted on the channel. Apparently not.
** you do not have permission to see this link ** I read a lot about Spinoza and some of his writings. He did not deny the existence of Jesus.
Please point me to a passage or passages you think say otherwise. Also, while you’re at it, give me the name of a Spinoza scholar or two who believe as you do.
Why would you think otherwise? Because of a video from a channel that suggests that Jesus had 12 children and that his father was a Roman senator? But wait a minute, now they’re telling us he never existed! How did the Vatican then confirm he has 127 direct descendants?
I’d love to have a discussion with you about this, but in order for that to take place, it’s going to mean you addressing my questions and concerns. If you avoid them as you have so often done in the past, there’s no really no point; I’m tired of wasting my time being stonewalled.
Stephen, are you denying that?
What, asking me a question?
So there are certain situations in which you do want to have a discussion with me? I hope you will remember this post the next time you decide to banish me to Outer Darkness simply because I disagree with your opinion. (Though to be honest, you never actually give an opinion. You seem content to quote others and expect us to respond to them.) Truthfully, I’m interested in what you think. I want to hear how your life experiences have informed your opinions. Posting a video is pretty much a waste of time unless you have thoughts about it. It doesn’t matter if I agree with you. Talk to us, not at us.
BJH
Video: Jesus Was NOT Jewish – The Origin the Church Hid for 2,000 Years | Spinoza
More conspiratorial nonsense:
Steefen
For more than a decade, I have been looking into why Jesus says “your” instead of “our” since Jesus supposed to be Jewish and using the TANAK.
It is not conspiratorial nonsense because that sentiment is expressed in the Gospel of John.
With your bad attitude, I do not expect to learn anything from you about why the Gospel of John uses this expression.
If you’re going to bring an impolite attitude to the discussion forums, why even participate in a discussion forum?
BJH
Are you denying Jesus was Jewish? On what basis? Are there any scholars who think this was the case?
Steefen
More than one of the composite characters of the historical fictitious Jesus was not Jewish.
#1 The Gospel of John, in Jesus’ own words, the implication is that he is NOT Jewish: Jesus says Your law instead of Our law.
I agree with the first YouTube video.
I will watch the other two YouTube videos because I came to the same conclusions.
Thus there are three arguments I already agree with from 17+ years of research.
If you all do not want willingly participate in a discussion with me. I can live with that. I have my own knowledge base and I have ChatGPT and the YouTube videos themselves. I also have libraries.
The youtube video speaks for the Gospel of John. It provides an explanation for the Gospel of John.
BJH and Stephen agrees with it.
What’s wrong with you? You do not see the verses in Gospel of John where Jesus does not include himself in “Your” Law?
What’s wrong with you that you do not see the difference between Israel and Judea?
I do not need a useless scholar to tell me Galilee is NOT Judea.
The essayist in the YouTube video provided an excellent explanation of why Jesus did not count himself among the political elite of Jerusalem. The essayist is also useless in the basic fact that Jesus was a Galilean, not a Judean.
However, he rightfully provides historical reasons why Galileans were not as conservative as Judeans.
Since I already agree with the video for different reasons and I am convinced there are cultural traits of the northern territory that strengthen my position, your little prodding and Stephen’s little prodding and BJH’s little prodding to double check the Spinoza statements will not make a difference. The content creator already has my respect for having reached correct conclusions as stated by the Gospel of John itself. No need to question that. JESUS himself has already spoken.
What? Some “scholar” is going to overturn Jesus’ implication, is going to re-write the Gospel of John, that the Law is your law, not our law?
You commented on this thread.
That was you forcing yourself into the conversation.
After YEARS of waiting for the blocking feature, it never came. So, you force yourself into topics I start.
My conscience is clear. For years I have made attempts to engage you in conversation. You require disciples. I am unavailable. In this open forum I reserve the right to stick my head through any door I see. If this disturbs you simply ignore me. Your loss. Not mine.
What’s wrong with you? You do not see the verses in Gospel of John where Jesus does not include himself in “Your” Law?
The suggestion by some that the author of the gospel of John was a gentile convert has never occurred to you?
…your little prodding and Stephen’s little prodding and BJH’s little prodding to double check the Spinoza statements will not make a difference…
What a surprise! But who is a better judge of Spinoza’s thought than Spinoza?
Merry Christmas to you Steefen. I wish you well. May you receive your heart’s desire.
Who is the “your” shows you are not reading the Gospel of John, you’re not reading the title of the thread, you’re not reading the thread.
Who do you think Jesus is criticizing in John 10:34, Robert?
I really shouldn’t have to waste my time explaining this to you. This is why you and your rules do not foster productivity.
I can talk with anyone about this matter.
I can go to Dallas Unitarian Universalism church and have this conversion without a bunch of nonsense.
I can go to the Theological Library at SMU and have this conversation without a bunch of nonsense.
I can go to Highland Park United Methodist Church and have this conversation without a bunch of nonsense.
What is the video saying about Jesus being from Galilee and not from Judea, or Jerusalem specifically?
Why does Jesus criticize by saying your law instead of the inclusive our law in the gospel of John?
Galilee was MARGINAL to Jerusalem’s religious bureaucracy. And, again, Gospel of John, 1:46 Can anything good come out of Nazareth? Jesus did not want to be part of Jerusalem’s religious bureaucracy and they didn’t want a Galilean criticizing them.
Again. That is credible. So your rule has no integrity. The video is credible.
That Jesus’ position was:
1 Priestly power had corrupted the Temple’s bureaucracy.
2 The Law/Torah was more ethical than it was dogma.
I learned from Spinoza, not Ehrman, that the importance of Jesus being from Galilee and not Judea was that Jesus saw power in the truth of common sense ethics rather than abiding by the letter of the law. AND YOU CALL THAT SENSATIONAL MISLEADING CONTENT. I disagree. That is what make Jesus worth following.
Go on: show us how
Theological – Political Treatise by Baruch Spinoza says the opposite.
Go on: show us how
Spinoza : Theological-Political Treatise by Jonathan Israel and Michael Silverthorne says the opposite.
The video made valid points about Jesus not joining the priestly bureaucracy.
I highly doubt Bart would disagree with the sentiment of the video.
To prove you and your Rule 5 is worthless, I can ask Bart:
Bart, in the Gospel of John, was Jesus against the bureaucracy of Temple priests?
Your Forum Administrator, Robert, thinks that is not the case and he is faulting me because someone who claims to know Spinoza’s philosophy and says Jesus had issues with the Pharisees. This YouTube content creator who specializes in Spinoza is not saying anything Steven Nadler wouldn’t say Steven Nadler was published by Princeton University Press for his book: A Book Forged in Hell: Spinoza’s Scandalous Treatise and the Birth of the Secular Age.
Do I really need to do that?
There is no misinformation.
Jesus was a Galilean, he was not a member of the Temple bureaucracy, period.
Neither you nor Stephen, nor BJH have presented evidence from Spinoza’s book, or books of the two top Spinoza scholars that refute: Jesus had issues with Temple bureaucracy and Pharisees or that the Gospel of John should not have put the words IN JESUS’ MOUTH that he was wrong to use “your” instead of “our.”
There is no misinformation here.
Second, BJH is not discussing the thread: he’s looking at video titles. That is not discussing the topic at hand.
Third, Stephen is not discussing the thread, the content of the title of the thread, the content of the video, the content of the Gospel of John.
So you want me to discuss their topics? I am not participating in scope drift. They want to scope drift this thread. They are rude to corrupt this thread as they have. What kind of administration of threads do you think you’re doing allowing members to insult discussion topics. I pick a gospel of John topic. I pick a well-known philosopher. And you still force these respectable selections to degenerate into some violation of some rule.
There is nothing sensational about the Gospel of John or that Jesus was outside of bureaucracy of the Temple.
Spinoza stripped Jesus of supernatural metaphysics, denied miracles, denied Jesus founded a new priestly religion.
The Gospels said a man who did miracles and signs existed. Spinoza doesn’t agree with that. Therefore THAT Jesus did not exist. THAT Jesus is a myth. THAT is not misinformation. So, there. Stephen does not have to watch the video that proves him wrong. If Jesus did not do miracles and did not give us signs of his supernatural nature, THAT Jesus did NOT exist.
Robert
You are disagreeing with something I have not said.
Steefen
You said the first video is misinformation. I proved that was wrong.
You said the second video is misinformation. I proved that was wrong.
You said the the third video is misinformation.
What is the the third video? Answer: Paul Never Met Jesus. That is NOT misinformation.
What is wrong with you? Why are you wasting my time?
1. Jesus was a Galilean, not part of the Temple bureaucracy.
2. Jesus who did miracles did not exist.
3. Paul never met Jesus.
Why are you arguing with Spinoza and me ? ? ? You think Bart would disagree with Spinoza and me?
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert