RE: [TruthTalk] Is Truth always rational?

[ShieldsFamily]

Be aware that not “all churches” ignore such things—such as non-denominational fellowship.  The pastor often includes such things in his messages. Izzy   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Powers Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 2:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is Truth always rational?   And do not forget the Pharisees called Yeshua "Rabbi". Had Yeshua not ben a respected rabbi they would never have called him that. Just another bit of semitic semantics for ya all to consider! I know your churches fail to teach this very fine point, but those of semitic mindset would quickly and easily recognise this! jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: Slade Henson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 14:47 Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Is Truth always rational?   We have evidence that Yeshua gained disciples of the Pharisaic ilk (there;s that word again), for Nakdimon/Nicodemus was one such adherent. In fact, he [Nakdimon, AKA Buni] was considered an apostate because of his belief in Yeshua in later Judaic writings. Certainly he was not the only one for the book of Acts says that no t even Pharisees but also those of the Priestly caste believed. Out of the broad stroke understanding of the different sects of Judaism, I know of only one that appreciated Hellenism... the Sadducees. In fact, the Highest ranking official of the day said, "Let one man die so that the whole nation can survive." How Hellenistic. A Pharisee would have tried to figure out how to keep every part of the nation alive.   So put that in your myth pipe and smoke it! :)   --slade   Also, when I say, "like" I don't mean in a static "Oh, yeah. He's a nice guy. Now I'm off on my merry way." I mean it more in an active manner. They would have engaged Him in conversation (NT evidence exists, though misinterpreted as a "trap" as opposed to a "test"), they would have eaten with Him (NT evidence exists), and they would have allowed him Synagogue participation (NT evidence exists).    -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 11 December, 2004 22.59 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Is Truth always rational? myth (the summary sweep, below, conveniently omits referenc/s to key historicl, exegetical, literary, and theologicl data [e.g., one of your arguments is that HH, or members of HH, 'liked' JC--so what? what does it really mean?--does it mean that P/HH had nothin' to do w/ PaxR, below? the NT is v consistent about JCs terms of discipleship..th disciples prob 'liked' JC..how do NT authrs portray whom JC sought? but, when Pharisees approach  JC in the NT, is there evidenc that any were advancd to his inner circle? aside from mayb Nicodms/Jn3, it appears that Pharisee 'approachs' were always layg traps (against any insurgnc, e.g., Jn9, not only for JC)..lets examin NT evidnc to th contrary]   On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:48:58 -0500 Slade Henson writes: Pax Romana..ruled supreme, and Yeshua died.