Meaning of "Us" in Genesis.

I guess you mean "all christian scholars" who serve on the commitee of the "Jesus Seminar".While you are at it could you also inform us that "all astrophysicists" also agree that the earth is flat? On your say so accept Isaiah 9:6 as not refering to the Messiah to come? Not a chance. Not a chance at all.Accept you and your "all christian scholars" on an interpretation of Isaiah 9:6 ?Not a chance I would be so deceived. Jesus not only taught that to see Him was to see the Father. He acted in a manner consistent with the teaching.Not a chance your delusive lie could deceive me that Isaiah was not prophecying about Christ. Wrong again.Most importantly the One who behaved as a Divine / Human taught so. And His life manifested such a reality too."Philip said to Him, Lord show us the Father and it is sufficuent for us.

​

Jesus said to him, Have I been so long with you, and you have not known Me Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father." (John 14:8,9) Jesus could have very well gone on to say:"Philip, don't you recall what the prophet Isaiah wrote, that the Son given shall be called the Eternal Father. Have I been so long with you now and you do not recognize Me Philip. You have been observing God in Me Philip. You have been seeing the Eternal Father manifested in Me Philip. How can you stand there and say 'Lord show us the Father.' Philip, its ME ... I AM RIGHT HERE. " All the writing of the New Testament confirm the mysterious nature of God - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Where One is the Other is living also within Him.The co-inherance of the Three make it that within the Father is the Son and within the Son is the Father."Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak from Myself, but the Father who abides in Me does His works.

​

Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; but if not, believe because of the works themselves." (John 14:10,11) Some of us have decided to believe that the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father, either because of the trustworthy words of the Lord Jesus or the works which manifest that He is the Eternal God become a man.Some unbelievers like yourself and your "all christian scholars" (from the Jesus Seminar or other skeptical Christ opposing committe) are deceived and leading each other around like the blind leading the blind.Who else in human history qualifies to be believed in as the Mighty God born in a woman as a "child" and as the given Son who manifests the Eternal Father?Who else would you submit as a candidate to be the referent to Isaiah 9:6?Hezekiah neither acted that way nor taught that way. Hezekiah is out.Perhaps someone yet to come on the scene is the referent? That is someone whose personality will have more impact than Jesus of Nazareth?Well until such a one comes (barring the Antichrist to come) my bets are on Jesus. He both lived as THE Mighty God and manifested the glory of the Eternal Father.You can follow your dubious "all christian scholars" to hope someone OTHER than Jesus is who the prophecy refered to.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

On your say so accept Isaiah 9:6 as not refering to the Messiah to come? Not a chance. Not a chance at all.

---

I don't see anything which you seem to attach to this verse [unless you gave wrong refs]:

quote:

---

Isaiah 9/6 That the government may be increased, and of peace there be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it through justice and through righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts doth perform this. {P}

---

I know there are words such as son, and maiden [wrongly translated as virgin], but those verses are vested in the 'past' tense, and are clearly connected with historically evidenced events in that time: a host of prominant christian scholars have now acknowledged this error - why should you dspute it? Christianity can well prevail without having to rely on what may not be correct.I think an honest disagreement beats a dishonest agreement - and there are heaps of other verses in isaiah which are disregarded - the real reason I even debate the issue. It is ok to disagree - as long as it is a justifiable and credible disagreement, and this says, one must not be selective. I have no other reason to dispute it - its not like I want to offend you.This is the final verse Isaiah culminated his writings - what do you make of it?

quote:

---

21 And of them also will I take for the priests and for the Levites, saith the LORD. 22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before Me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, saith the LORD.

---

We are not even on the same page yet. Look up Isaiah 9:6. Do you have an English translation of the book of the Old Testament ?Nothing in that verse about maiden or virgin. That is ANOTHER verse in Isaiah which is not under discussion right now, by me at least.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Yes, I posted 9/6 in my last post, so why are we not on the same page? It has no connection with the NT - except that christians also cherish these exquisite writings as divinely inspired.Like the OT is for Judaism, the NT is best seen that way for christians also, namely, these are bridges for elevation. This means, ultimately, all the revered ones will be pointers, and they will stand down with the rest of humanity and harken to the Father/One God. The issue of the son or any other agent will be replaced and corrected, but with no loss or demeaning to the sincere seekers whatsoever, and no amount of manourverings will allow or require any equivalencing with the ONE. Son does not transcend father, nor are these two on one equal plane - ultimately. When the agent transcends the message, it goes into paganism, a goodly intended wrong path.You will see that both Judaism and Islam beget their vindication from Monotheism and ONE God. The NT depends on all its merit on the OT - without which it would become part of hellinism, a syndrome which takes a very long time to discard. All other belief systems also will arrive to Monotheism eventually. But in its due time. In the interim, none have immunity of special merit outside of their deeds and actions. A bad christian, for example, is not saved before a good hindu - this is the basis of the OT laws.Thus was Moses commanded to stand down with the people. This allows no immunity to anyone else, and is a good and correct advocation. Christianity will ultimately see this light.

The word virgin is wrongly translated. And son does not point to the NT premise: if you look with honest and unbiased lens, you will find 1000s of verses which negate this premise in a non-confusing mode.

The Hebrew word translated as "virgin" in my English Version of the Bible does not mean "cannot be an unmarried woman."Arguments about that word to show various facets of its application don't prove that the word CANNOT apply to the concept of an unwed young woman as we understand "virgin" - in this case miraculously conceiving and giving birth to a child (without the help of a human male source of sperm).At best all you can do is show that the word can take on OTHER meanings. You cannot prove that it can never mean "virgin".And that dispute is about Isaiah 7:14 rather than 9:6.Aside from this the Apostle Matthew says that Isaiah 7:14 was fulfilled in the birth of Jesus from the virgin woman Mary. That is enough to end the argument right there. I do not regard the New Testament as a faulty error prone commentary on the Hebrew Bible.Matthew said that that verse means the birth of Jesus from Mary. Then that is what it means. That is the end of the discussion for those of us who regard the New Testament as the word of God.But in addition, the translators of the Greek Version of the book of Isaiah used a Greek word to communicate to us that the concept of virgin as we know it should be translated in Isaiah. They could not have been biased towards the events of the New Testament because the translation took place some 300 years prior to the birth of Jesus and the Christian doctrines of the NT.Without being enfluenced by NT doctrine which had not yet been developed they provided their understanding in Greek of what the Hebrew word there should signify.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

At best all you can do is show that the word can take on OTHER meanings. You cannot prove that it can never mean "virgin".

---

Your wrong, hanging on to incorrect teachings made w/o proper knowledge of the Hebrew. But many christian scholars have agreed that 'all' of the Isaiah translations as slanting to a NT setting were incorrect. Anyway, a belief becomes a force of its own, and it is not debatable by reasonings.My point to you was, the first and foremost understanding of Isaiah is of his religion, nation and people, and a Godly incline in strict keeping of the OT and Mosaic laws; this means there is really no understsnding of his writings's actual texts or that it is not important to you - not in your radar. Reading all your posts makes it sound aside from inclining to the Gospels and Jesus - Isaiah has nothing to say.The problem of analysing a text from such a belief premise, in contrast to what the texts is saying, has to also deal with Islam which says Mohammed knew Adam and born before him too. I cannot see how that is irrelevent, unless you agreed that a manifest historical rendition of identifiable narratives must at all times transcend a belief. Else there is no such thing as truth anymore - it becomes subject to whatever one wants to read of it, while ignoring all it is saying.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

And that dispute is about Isaiah 7:14 rather than 9:6.

---

I know the verse. I also know it is preambled with historical and contemporary characters, making it's inclining with the NT without any basis. Read all the preceding and follow-up verses.

quote:

---

Isaiah Chapter 7
1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Aram, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to war against it; but could not prevail against it. 2 And it was told the house of David, saying: 'Aram is confederate with Ephraim.' And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest are moved with the wind. {S} 3 Then said the LORD unto Isaiah: 'Go forth

​

14 Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

---

The word son also appears in v 4:

quote:

---

now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the highway of the fullers' field; 4 and say unto him: Keep calm, and be quiet; fear not, neither let thy heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram, and of the son of Remaliah. 5 Because Aram hath counselled evil against thee, Ephraim also, and the son of Remaliah, saying: 6 Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set up a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeel; {P}

---

I understand that the passage of Isaiah's prophecy had some immediate application. I understand that it had meaning to the contemporaries of that day long before Jesus was born.The birth of the prophet Isaiah's son in chapter 8:3 was probably what was immediately intended.But prophecy also has its ultimate fulfillment. And we find the incarnation of Jesus born of the virgin Mary to be a fulfillment in an ultimate sense to the temporary application to Isaiah's son in 8:3. The fact that the New Testament apostle tells us the same is the main reason for my understanding.If one wants to one can examine the surrounding verses and reason that the prophecy has absolutely nothing to do with the birth of Jesus. I sympathize with that kind of doubting but I don't agree with it.Yes, I could have a Bible Study of Isaiah which concerned only the facts significant to his life and times. I can study the Old Testament for its own sake.However, the nature of God's word is mysterious. So much of what God speaks and does is based on His previous words and actions. And the more ultimate fulfillment of 7:14 is the birth of a man with two natures - divine and human, from the virgin woman Mary. That was indeed a sign and a miraculous act of God.This one was truly Immanuel - God with us. Jesus Christ as a God-man, as the mingling of God and man is more ultimately the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy.I do not say that 7:14 had no more contemporary significance to Isaiah's immediate time. I only say that the more ultimate fulfilment is with Jesus Christ.Think of a pyramid coming up out of the ocean. When it comes up only three feet it is a pyramid. When it ascends up thirty feet it still has the shape of a pyramid. When it ascends up one thousand feet it still has the shape of a great pyramid.Let us see this mighty shape now coming up a whole mile, it is then a huge pyramid. At every stage the shape is the same.This is how the prophetic word of God is at times. The fulfillments do come sometimes in more than one stage. The essential shape is the same but the power and majesty encrease.I take then that 7:14 had some contemorary significance to its audience. But a mightier and more transcendent application God reserved for it latter.

quote:

---

I take then that 7:14 had some contemorary significance to its audience. But a mightier and more transcendent application God reserved for it latter.

---

This also fosters the situation disregardimg the primary text, and it becomes a religious debate, as opposed anaylsing what the text says in prima facie. As I mentioned, we have also other scriptures, such as the quran, which has its own views on what Isaiah meant, retrospectively and after 2000 years, and which you do not agree with - despite that this too is borne of a strong belief. Prima facie, isaiah has not 'some contemporary significance' to his nation and people, but total; the rest is secondary; the same would apply to the gospels - it is not secondary of its own adherants.Its like someone telling you that Paul's writings had secondary application to his contemporary surrounds and people 2000 years ago, and is only prima facie relevent today, and from the pov of another belief system: would you accept that? Thus to understand isaiah, in truth and in context, one has to know the contemporary meaning of his writings, without omissions, then decide if it had secondary relevance to his people.With regard the connecting of this writings as if it had first and foremost application to the gospels, I can post you christian scholars who have debunked this premise - it was an over zealous and wring translation and allocation, while this acknowkedgement still does not suffer any loss of belief in the gospels. There is no factor in Isaiah following anything other than the Mosaic, in line with some 55 other Hebrew prophets and the psalms - but these writings are also cherished by christians. This is the true situation.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Jay, you will see my deliberation with you is not w/o substance. Here you see two verses from the same writings and author; one says maiden, the other says virgin, and these are two different words in the hebrew.7/14 Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.62/5 For as a young man espouseth a virgin, so shall thy sons espouse thee; and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.Edited by Admin, : Delete portion that had possibly been Hebrew but had somehow gotten trashed.

[/b] No it does not disregard the primary text. Behind the Bible is the living God. And he has used His word again at a latter time in His ongoing move to carry out His eternal purpose. You have to decide who you are going to believe.In human history there is ONE outstanding figure who was born of a virgin - that is Jesus of Nazareth. Not only is He the God-man born miraculously from the virgin He is also "the seed of the woman" promised in Genesis 3:15[/b] Who would crush the head of the serpent and have His own heal bruised in the process.You are trying very hard to ignore the "elaphant under the rug" so to speak, in the living room. Christ is too significant to ignore or brush aside. And making excuses that "Well, Islam also said something about what Isaiah meant" doesn't help the case to render the testimony of Jesus Christ insignificant.There is a lesson to be learned from Moses in the Exodus. The Bible tells us that when God sent Moses to perform signs before Pharoah, that Pharoah resisted by providing his own magicians who could do some of the same signs also. This imitation was meant to nullify and delute the claims of Moses as he spoke for God. Because Pharoah had magicians who by thier occult arts could imitate the miracle of God, Pharoah's heart was hardened. He thought "What is so special about what Moses does. My magicians can do the same."Again in the miracle of water turned to blood at the command of Moses and Aaron on behalf of God, the Egyptian magicians did the same with their secret spells (Exo. 7:22)Do not be fooled by imitation.Again in the sign of the plague of frogs - You should know that in spite of these imitations for a season eventually Pharoah was subdued by God and let Israel go.Do not be impressed that Islam can pretend to be like the Gospel of Christ. Do not be hardened because the Moslem religion can refer "prophetically" to Isaiah and tailor it refer to Islam's false teachings. This is like the magicians of Egypt imitating the acts of God through Moses.What will you do if you are alive when the Antuichrist comes? He will come pretending to be the killed and resurrected Savior of the world. The decption will be so powerful that millions will be deceived. But he is Antichrist and not Christ the Messiah. To whom would you point to as being like Jesus Christ ? Who would you refer to as testifying in a more powerful way that he was in God and God was in him?Surely, you would compare Mohammed or Joseph Smith to Christ.
Then maybe you would.As for me I think Jesus occupies a class of men of which He alone is the member. The closest imitation is no where near the splendour of Christ. What we have to do is understand how Hezekiah and Cyrus and the son of Isaiah are all pointers to the Son of God Who by that time was to come. Sure, Cyrus was God's servant. But he is pointer to Christ. Yes Isaiah speaks of Cyrus an of Israel as the servant of God. But these eventually become pointers to the Son of God.Through Isaiah the prophet God warns the Israelites that He will perform new things which will be more significant than the things He performed in the past: God prepares His seekers to witness new mighty acts of truth and justice which He will perform. That would also include the "new covenant" which He promised through Jeremiah the prophet.Such a new thing, such a new covenant involves the incarnation of God to be a man, His life on earth, death, resurrection, enthronement and dispensing of Himself into His redeemed believers. Of course you can pick and choose your scholars.I trust the apostle Matthew in his applying Isa. 7:14 to the miraculous birth of Jesus.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Hi jay, The problem with the word translated young woman or virgin is the belief of whether Jesus was God as He claimed or a man, as the Pharisees claimed.Those who don't want to believe Jesus is God or the Messiah has to demote Him to an ordinary man.To believe that He was born of a virgin would mean that He did not have an earthly father. If he had no earthly father it would be necessary to believe Matthew's account of the virgin birth meaning Jesus was the Son of God thus God as He claimed.Since that is unthinkable to many they make Him human.Try as they may they can not change the fact that Jesus was God in the flesh and that He died for the sins of the world that whosoever would believe on His name would be saved. John 3:18.As I understand it the Hebrew Bibles today come from the Masoretic Text. This Text was finished in 1008 by people who did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah.The Greek OT was completed 1300 years prior to the Masoretic Text and was in use in the days of Jesus. That is why Jesus quoted it, as well as Matthew, Paul and others.Yes I think I will agree and take what Matthew and the Septuagint said over what a group of people that did not believe Jesus was God said.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

quote:

---

As I understand it the Hebrew Bibles today come from the Masoretic Text. This Text was finished in 1008 by people who did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah.

---

We have the dead sea scrolls, which is not greek but Hebrew. Nor does it mean if one quoted the Masoteric that one can deem this to be the Creator, not does it mean that anyone not subsubscribing to the gospels is an unbeliever in God. The greatest proof of belief is not contained in the gospels. This is the defense and sacrifice of 1.1 million Jews who stood up against Rome - unforgivably absent in the gospels. In contrast, the church emulated divine emperors and heresy, murdering millions on charges they did not accept the gospels - nothing to do with calling someone God, or that others have no belief.The interpretation of Isaiah as having nothing worth mentioning outside of a lame, discredited interpretation of his verses as pertaining to the gosepls is also shameful.

quote:

---

No it does not disregard the primary text. Behind the Bible is the living God. And he has used His word again at a latter time in His ongoing move to carry out His eternal purpose.

---

You did it again! If you want to see what is behind the Bible, you would have referred to the return of Israel - as prophesized. Instead, you want to see the reverse of what Isaiah was saying. How can you claim to see behind the bible when you cannot see what is in front of it? - how can you talk about belief when factual history is omited? Where did you connect anything of isaiah than what that book is all about - as totally non relevant [read, elimination of a people and their history], condoned because you mentioned jesus. Your interpretation of isaiah has nothing to do with Isaiah - you are talking only about the gospels.

quote:

---

As I mentioned, we have also other scriptures, such as the quran, which has its own views on what Isaiah meant, retrospectively and after 2000 years, and which you do not agree with - despite that this too is borne of a strong belief.

​

You have to decide who you are going to believe.

---

You have to decide who and what you are not going to mention, namely the prima facie writings of Isaiah which is historical and first hand, as opposed a belated belief as its sole claim. Sometimes, one is best understood by what they don't say. Deciding whether to belive the gospels or the quran is not the issue - it still leaves humanity and history in total chaos - as is evidenced from medevial Europe's history what happens when the church says one who does not believe is of satan and to be slaughtered. Nor is a report of rising from the dead, made by 3rd parties, and then it died again in 3 days - anything called RESURRECTION. You pose it as such an honoruable and sublime premise: is it? FYI, Isaiah referred to the people, not a Messiahh, rising from the dead: a far greater feat than what you are talking about. A Messiah does not need saving.

quote:

---

In human history there is ONE outstanding figure who was born of a virgin

---

You are quite wrong. How one is born has no merit of that child. Merit is earned when one is totally cognant and able to make a decision, take responsibility for his own actions. Nor is one born lame or blind a bad person. Likewise, a prophet is one who saves - not one who destroys.

quote:

---

And Moses and Aaron came to Pharoah , and they did just as Jehovah had commanded; and Aaron threw down his staff before Pharoah and before his servants, and it became a serpent.
Then Pharoah also called for the wise men and the sorcerers; and they also, the magicians of Egypt, did the same with their secret spells.

​

That each one threw doen is staff, and they became serpents. But Aaton's staff swallowed up their staffs.

​

(Exo. 7:10-12)

​

Because Pharoah had magicians who by thier occult arts could imitate the miracle of God, Pharoah's heart was hardened. He thought "What is so special about what Moses does. My magicians can do the same."

​

Again in the miracle of water turned to blood at the command of Moses and Aaron on behalf of God, the Egyptian magicians did the same with their secret spells (Exo. 7:22)

​

Do not be fooled by imitation.

---

It is you who is fooled, and shows no understanding of sacred texts - or grammar. The first of every three plagues were made in a mode where Pharoah's preists could emulate it, the third of each set he could not - intentionally [the text]. This was to give him power and reason to change his mind - as an exposing of his true intent. The nile turning red is a case in point - here, even the water in a glass turned red in all of Egypt - but not so in Goshen. The other is the plague of darkness - the town of Goshen did not blacken. Also what you obviously cannot see in the text, is the plagues upon egypt were all outside of nature: frogs did what they never do; boils appeared to the cleanest of peoples; etc.Is it not ubsurd, you ridicule the power of the Father, which you seem not to understand at all or mention even in passing reluctantly and negatively, except to show how the son was triumphant? Now any fool would know, if one could turn a country into darkness and leave one sector in its midst not effected - then the feat of a staff and a serpant may have some other reason aside from not having that ability. I suggest you focus on Moses - he did save. And if you say jesus did not save his own people because they were so bad - I suggest you study some history of the Medevial church, and know that the Hebrews Moses saved were far more bad than the Jews in Judea 2000 years ago.You cannot 'choose' what you want to from Isaiah or the church's history when deciding what is good. Heaven does not omit as it pleases you. This too is behind the gospels, immediately after it took over from Rome, and which has nothing to do with a jew who's name even is not stated correctly. Learn to walk humbly before your God - the following has nothing whatsoever to do with belief, but factual history of one who should have known better. What do you imagine Jesus would have to say of the church:

quote:

---

A Catholic Timeline of Events Relating to Jews, Anti-Judaism, Antisemitism, and the Holocaust

​

From the 3rd Century to the Beginning of the Third Millennium
Prepared by Jerry Darring

​

Catholic Timeline on Antisemitism

​

c. 240 Origen of Alexandria writes that the Jews "have committed the most abominable of crimes" in conspiring against Christ, and for that reason "the Jewish nation was driven from its country, and another people was called by God to the blessed election"
248 St. Cyprian writes that the Jews have fallen under the heavy wrath of God, because they have departed from the Lord, and have followed idols
306 The Council of Elvira decrees that Christians and Jews cannot intermarry, have sexual intercourse, or eat together
325 Conversation and fellowship with Jews is forbidden to the clergy by the Council of Nicaea
4th century Christian emperors of Rome decree that Christians converting to Judaism, and Jews obstructing the conversion of other Jews to Christianity, will incur the death penalty; Jews can not marry Christians, or hold public office, or own slaves
c. 380 St. Gregory of Nyssa refers to the Jews as "murderers of the Lord, assassins of the prophets, rebels and detesters of God,... companions of the devil, race of vipers, informers, calumniators, darkeners of the mind, pharisaic leaven, Sanhedrin of demons, accursed, detested,... enemies of all that is beautiful"
c. 380 St. Ambrose calls the synagogue "a place of unbelief, a home of impiety, a refuge of insanity, damned by God Himself"
388 A mob of Christians, at the instigation of their bishop, looted and burned the synagogue in Callinicum, a town on the Euphrates. The Emperor Theodosius wants those responsible punished and the synagogue rebuilt at the expense of the bishop, but St. Ambrose, the bishop of Milan, pressures him to relent and condone the action
400 St. Augustine writes: "the Church admits and avows the Jewish people to be cursed, because after killing Christ they continue to till the ground of an earthly circumcision, an earthly Sabbath, an earthly passover, while the hidden strength or virtue of making known Christ, which this tilling contains, is not yielded to the Jews while they continue in impiety and unbelief, for it is revealed in the New Testament. While they will not turn to God, the veil which is on their minds in reading the Old Testament is not taken away... the Jewish people, like Cain, continue tilling the ground, in the carnal observance of the law, which does not yield to them its strength, because they do not perceive in it the grace of Christ"
c. 400 Calling the synagogue "brothel and theater" and "a cave of pirates and the lair of wild beasts," St. John Chrysostom writes that "the Jews behave no better than hogs and goats in their lewd grossness and the excesses of their gluttony"
413 A group of monks sweep through Palestine, destroying synagogues and massacring Jews at the Western Wall
414 St. Cyril of Alexandria expels Jews from his city
425 Jews are required by law to observe Christian feasts and fasts and to listen to sermons designed to persuade them to convert
442 The synagogue in Constantinople is turned into a church
529-553 The Code of the emperor Justinian decrees that in Christian Byzantine society Jews cannot read their sacred books in Hebrew in their synagogues, and the Mishnah and other rabbinic interpretations are banned
538 The Third Synod of Orléans decrees that Jews cannot show themselves in the streets during Passover Week
591 Pope St. Gregory the Great decrees that Jews are not to be forced into baptism "lest they return to their former superstition and die the worse for having been born again"
600 Pope St. Gregory the Great decrees that Jews should not have excessive freedom, but also "in no way should they suffer a violation of their rights"
681 The Synod of Toledo orders the burning of the Talmud and other books
768 Pope Stephen IV decries ownership of hereditary estates by "the Jewish people, ever rebellious against God and derogatory of our rites"
c. 830 Agobard, Archbishop of Lyons, writes anti-Jewish pamphlets in which he refers to Jews as "sons of darkness"
c. 937 Pope Leo VII encourages his newly appointed archbishop of Mainz to expel all Jews who refuse to be baptized
c. 1010-1020 In Rouen, Orléans, Limoges, Mainz, and probably also in Rome, Jews are converted by force, massacred, or expelled
1050 The Synod of Narbonne decrees that Christians are not permitted to live in Jewish homes
c. 1070 Pope Alexander II warns the bishops of Spain to prevent violence against the Jews because, unlike the Saracens, they "are prepared to live in servitude"
1078 The Synod of Gerona decrees that Jews must pay the same taxes as Christians to support the church
1081 Pope Gregory VII writes to King Alphonso of Spain telling him that if he allows Jews to be lords over Christians, he is oppressing the Church and exalting "the Synagogue of Satan"
1084 Rdiger, bishop of Speyer, grants the Jews a charter allowing them to keep Christian servants and serfs, own fields and vineyards, and carry arms
1096 Massacres of Jews takes place in the First Crusade, destroying entire Jewish communities in Mainz, Speyer, Worms, Cologne and other cities. The Jewish chronicler reports: "The enemies stripped them naked and dragged them off, granting quarter to none, save those few who accepted baptism. The number of the slain was eight hundred in these two days." The chronicler Guibert de Nogent reports that the Rouen Crusaders said: "We desire to go and fight God's enemies in the East; but we have before our eyes certain Jews, a race more inimical to God than any other"
1182 Jews are expelled from France, all their property is confiscated, and Christians' debts to them are cancelled with the payment of one-fifth of their value to the treasury
1190 The Third Crusade, led by Richard the Lion-Heart, stirs anti-Jewish fervor and results in the mass suicide of the York Jews in Clifford's Tower on March 16
1198 Jews are allowed to return to France
1199 Pope Innocent III decrees that Jews are to be allowed to worship in their synagogues, they are not to be coerced into baptism, and that Jewish cemeteries are not to be mutilated
1215 The Fourth Lateran Council decrees that Jews are to wear distinctive clothing, and on the three days before Easter they are not to go out in public
1222 The Council of Oxford prohibits the construction of new synagogues
1227 The Council of Narbonne orders Jews to wear a round patch
1230 Jews in France are forbidden to lend money on interest
1234 The Council of Arles orders Jews to wear a round patch
1235 Thirty-four Jews are burned to death in Fulda on a blood-libel charge
1246 The Council of Béziers orders Jews to wear a round patch
1247 Pope Innocent IV defends the Jews: "they are wrongly accused of partaking of the heart of a murdered child at the Passover... Whenever a corpse is found somewhere, it is to the Jews that the murder is wickedly imputed. They are persecuted on the pretext of such fables... they are deprived of trial and of regular judgment; in mockery of all justice, they are stripped of their belongings, starved, imprisoned and tortured"
1254 The Council of Albi orders Jews to wear a round patch
1260 The Council of Arles orders Jews to wear a round patch, but not when traveling
1267 The Synod of Vienna decrees that Christians cannot attend Jewish ceremonies, and Jews cannot dispute with simple Christian people about the Catholic religion
1267 The Synod of Breslau decrees compulsory ghettos for Jews
1267 Pope Clement IV instructs the Franciscans and Dominicans to deal with the "new Christians" who had reverted to Judaism
c. 1270 St. Thomas Aquinas writes that the Jews sin more in their unbelief than do pagans because they have abandoned the way of justice "after knowing it in some way"
1272 Pope Gregory X defends the Jews: "It happens sometimes that Christians lose their children and that the enemies of the Jews accuse them of having kidnaped and killed these children in order to offer sacrifices with their heart and blood, and it also happens that the parents themselves, or other Christians who are enemies to the Jews, hide the children and attack the Jews, demanding of them, as ransom, a certain sum of money, on the entirely false pretext that these children had been kidnaped and killed by the Jews"
1275 Jews in England are forbidden to lend money on interest
1279 The Synod of Ofen decrees that Christians cannot sell or rent real estate to Jews
1283 Jews in France are forbidden to live in the countryside
1284 The Council of Nmes orders Jews to wear a round patch
1289 The Council of Vienna orders Jews to wear a round patch
1290 Jews are expelled from England and southern Italy
1294 Jews in France are restricted to special quarters of the cities
1294 Jews are expelled from Bern
1298 The Jews of Rttingen, charged with profaning the Host, are massacred and burned down to the last one
1320 The "Shepherds' Crusade." A Christian chronicler records: "The shepherds laid siege to all the Jews who had come from all sides to take refuge... the Jews defended themselves heroically... but their resistance served no purpose, for the shepherds slaughtered a great number of the besieged Jews by smoke and by fire... The Jews, realizing that they would not escape alive, preferred to kill themselves... They chose one of their number (and) this man put some five hundred of them to death, with their consent. He then descended from the castle tower with the few Jewish children who still remained alive... They killed him by quartering. They spared the children, whom they made Catholics by baptism"
1326 The Council of Avignon orders Jews to wear a round patch, but not when traveling
1345 King John authorizes his subjects in Liegnitz and Breslau to destroy the Jewish cemeteries in order to use the tombstones to repair the city walls
1347-1350 During the Black Death, Jews are accused of poisoning wells in order to overthrow Christendom, and many thousands of Jews are killed. Pope Clement VI defends the Jews against these charges
1350 Jews are expelled from many parts of Germany
1367 Jews are expelled from Hungary
1368 The Council of Vabres orders Jews to wear a round patch
1381 Jews are expelled from Strasbourg
1394 The expulsion of Jews from France, begun in 1306, is completed with an edict promulgated on the Jewish Day of Atonement
1420 Jews are expelled from Mainz by the archbishop
1421 Jews are expelled from Austria
1424 Jews are expelled from Fribourg and Zurich
c. 1425 Pope Martin V denounces anti-Jewish preaching and forbids the forced baptism of Jewish children under the age of twelve
1426 Jews are expelled from Cologne
1432 Jews are expelled from Saxony
1434 The Council of Basel decrees that Jews cannot obtain academic degrees
1435 King Alfonso orders the Jews of Sicily to attach a round patch to their clothing and over their shops
1438 Jews are expelled from Mainz by the town councilors
1439 Jews are expelled from Augsburg
1453 Jews are expelled from Wurzburg
1454 Jews are expelled from Breslau
1456 Pope Callistus III bans all social communication between Christians and Jews
1462 Jews are expelled from Mainz following a conflict between two candidates for the archepiscopal seat
1467 Jews are expelled from Tlemcen
1471 Jews are expelled from Mainz by the archbishop
1475 The entire Jewish community in Trent, northern Italy, is put to death on the allegation that it had murdered a boy for religious purposes
1485 Jews are expelled from Warsaw and Cracow
1492 After forcing many Jews to be baptized and then referring to them as Marranos (swine), and after an Inquisition in which some 700 Marranos were burnt at the stake for showing signs of "Jewish" taint, Spain expels all Jews from the country
1497 Jews are expelled from Portugal
1519 Jews are expelled from Regensburg
1553 Cardinal Carafa instigates a public burning of copies of the Talmud and other Jewish religious works in a square in Rome
1555-1559 Pope Paul IV restricts Jews to ghettos and decrees that they are to wear distinctive headgear
1566-1572 Pope St. Pius V expels Jews from the Papal States, allowing some to remain in Rome's ghettos and in Ancona for commercial reasons
1592-1605 Pope Clement VIII includes a ban on all Jewish books in the expanded Index of Forbidden Books
1826 Pope Leo XII decrees that Jews are to be confined to ghettos and their property is to be confiscated
1858 Edgardo Mortara, 6-year old son of a Jewish family in Bologna, is abducted by the papal police and brought to Rome. He had been secretly baptized five years earlier by a domestic servant who thought he was about to die. The parents try to get the boy back, and there is a universal outcry, but Pope Pius IX rejects all petitions submitted to him
1904 In an interview with Zionist leader Theodor Hertzl, Pope St. Pius X says: "I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do... The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people... If you go to Palestine and your people settle there, you will find us clergy and churches ready to baptize you all"
1919 Newly independent Poland passes a law making Sunday a compulsory day of rest in Poland. The law is intended to force Jews to observe the Christian sabbath in addition to their own
1921 Speaking for Pope Benedict XV, a Vatican spokesman informed representatives of the Zionist Movement htat they did not wish to assist "the Jewish race, which is permeated with a revolutionary and rebellious spirit" to gain control over the Holy Land
1925 At a conference of Catholic academicians in Innsbruck, Austria, Bishop Sigismund Waitz calls the Jews an "alien people" who had corrupted England, France, Italy, and especially America
1933 In a series of Advent sermons, Cardinal Faulhaber of Munich defends the Old Testament against Nazi attacks but emphasizes that it is not his intention to defend contemporary Jewry, saying that a distinction has to be drawn between Jews living before and after the crucifixion of Jesus
1933 In a pastoral letter on January 23, Bishop Johannes Maria Gfllner of Linz, Austria, declares that while the radical anti-Semitism preached by Nazism is completely incompatible with Christianity, it is the right and duty of Christians to fight and break the harmful influences of Jewry in all areas of modern cultural life. The Austrian episcopate condemns the letter in December for causing racial hatred and conflict
1933-1939 The general consensus among the Catholic papers in Poland is that Jewish influence should be reduced in all areas of life, that the Polish and Jewish communities should be separated as much as possible, and that the most desirable option is mass emigration of the Jews from Poland. St. Maximilian Kolbe is an active promoter of antisemitic literature
1935-1936 The Polish Catholic Church gives full support to a government policy encouraging Jewish emigration from Poland
1936 Cardinal August Hlond, the primate of Poland, issues a pastoral letter, stating: "I warn you against that ethical attitude that is fundamentally and uncompromisingly anti-Jewish. It is contradictory to Catholic ethics. It is permissible to love your nation more than others, but it is not permissible to hate anyone. Not even the Jews... You should close yourselves to the harmful influence of Jewry... But you may not attack Jews, beat them, hurt them, slander them. In a Jew you should also respect and love a human being and your neighbor"
1937 Austrian bishop Alois Hudal publishes a book defending Nazi racial ideology, supporting laws preventing a flood of Jewish immigrants, and criticizing the "Jewish" press for playing off Austrians against Germans. His book receives the support of Archbishop (later Cardinal) Theodor Innitzer of Vienna
1938 In a speech before Belgian pilgrims, Pope Pius XI denounces antisemitism and says: "Spiritually we are all Semites." His comments are reported in various newspapers but not in the Vatican's L'Osservatore Romano
1939 Josef Tiso, a Catholic priest with a doctorate in theology, became president of independent Slovakia. An extremist hater of Jews, he allied Slovakia with Nazi Germany and, with strong objections from the Vatican, deported most Slovakian Jews to their deaths in the camps. He declared: "It is a Christian action to expel the Jews, because it is for the good of the people, which is thus getting rid of its pests." Monsignor Tiso was executed after the war as a war criminal
1941-1945 The "Final Solution" takes place in Nazi-occupied Europe. This Holocaust, the killing of some six million Jews, "happened in the 'heartland' of Western Christian Europe... It happened with the passive acquiescence or active collaboration of most European Christians, and no decisive protest from church leadership, Catholic or protestant" (Rosemary Radford Ruether)
1941 In Croatia, Bishop Ivan Saric of Sarajevo appropriates Jewish property for his own use. His diocesan newspaper declares that "Jewish greed increases. The Jews have led Europe and the world towards disaster, moral and economic disaster. Their appetite grows till only domination of the whole world will satisfy it." Bishop Aksamovic of Djakovic teaches that "today it is the sacred duty of every citizen to prove his Aryan origins." Meanwhile, Archbishop Aloys Stepinac of Zagreb preaches in a sermon that "it is forbidden to exterminate Gypsies and Jews because they are said to belong to an inferior race"
1941 Provost Bernard Lichtenberg of Berlin's St. Hedwig Cathedral publicly declares that he will include Jews in his daily prayers. On October 23 he is arrested and sent to Dauchau, but dies on the way
1941 The German Bishops' Conference issues a pastoral letter secretly distributed and read from all pulpits. It outlines in detail the Nazi assault on the Catholic Church, but makes no mention of the Jews
1941 In Operational Situation Report USSR No. 54, the German Einsatzgruppen A reports from Kaunas, Lithuania: "The attitude of the Church regarding the Jewish question is, in general, clear. In addition, Bishop Brisgys has forbidden all clergymen to help Jews in any form whatsoever. He rejected several Jewish delegations who approached him personally and asked for his intervention with the German authorities. In the future he will not meet with any Jews at all"
1942 The French Assembly of Cardinals and Archbishops sends a letter to Marshal Pétain, head of the Vichy government, protesting against the mass arrests and cruel treatment of the French Jews
1942 Protest against the persecution of Dutch Jews is read from the pulpit of all churches in Holland
1942 In August and September, messages to be read out in their churches protesting the deportation of Jews from France are written by Archbishop Salige of Toulouse, Bishop Théas of Montauban, Bishop Delay of Marseilles, Cardinal Gerlier of Lyon, Bishop Vanstenbergher of Bayonne, and Archbishop Moussaron of Albi
1942 Great Britain, the Polish Government-in-exile, Brazil, the United States, and Uruguay press Pope Pius XII to condemn the Nazi treatment of Jews. The Pope responds to this international appeal with his Christmas radio address, but does not specifically mention the Jews
1942-1945 Cardinal Adolf Bertram, Archbishop of Breslau and head of the German Bishops' Conference, opposes all public protest against the deportation and massacre of the Jews. He maintains a cordial relationship with Hitler, and in May 1945 he orders requiem masses for Hitler be offered in all his parishes
1943 At their annual meeting in Fulda, the German Catholic bishops debate whether to speak out about the Holocaust and confront Hitler with a direct accusation. They decide not to do so
1943 Slovakia's Catholic Bishops protest the deportation of Jews in a pastoral letter read in Latin from the pulpits. Many priests refuse to read it or insert their own negative comments
1945 Addressing the College of Cardinals after the end of the European war, Pope Pius XII speaks of the hundreds of priests and religious who died in Nazi concentration camps, but makes no mention of the Jews
1965 The Second Vatican Council issues its Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions: "True, authorities of the Jews and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be blamed upon all the Jews then living, without distinction, nor upon the Jews of today... The Jews should not be presented as repudiated or cursed by God... The Church decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone"
1967 The Catholic bishops in the United States establish an Office on Catholic-Jewish Relations, and promptly issues Guidelines for Catholic-Jewish Relations
1967 In an interview with a Los Angeles rabbi, Cardinal Frings of Cologne, Germany, states that the Jews had been economically too powerful in the 1920s, and he doubts if six million Jews had actually been killed under Hitler
1974 The Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews issues its Guidelines for Catholic-Jewish Relations: "The spiritual ties and historical relations between the Church and Judaism are enough to condemn, as contrary to the spirit of Christianity, all forms of anti-Semitism and discrimination"
1979 Pope John Paul II visits Auschwitz and refers to the Holocaust as "the Golgotha of our century"
1980 The German Bishops Conference declares: "A serious dialogue of reciprocal love and understanding must replace the 'anti-Semitism' which, to some extent, still lives on in Christians. The spiritual bonds and historical statements that bind the Church and Judaism condemn any form of anti-Semitism as contradictory to the spirit of Christianity"
1984 The National Conference of Brazilian Bishops declares: "All forms of anti-Semitism must be condemned. Every unfavorable word and expression must be erased from Christian speech. All campaigns of physical or moral violence must cease. The Jew must not be considered a deicide people"
1985 The Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews issues the document Notes on the Correct Way to Present the Jews and Judaism in Preaching and Catechesis in the Roman Catholic Church: "Our two traditions are so related that they cannot ignore each other. Mutual knowledge must be encouraged at every level. There is evident in particular a painful ignorance of the history and traditions of Judaism, of which only negative aspects and often caricature seem to form part of the stock ideas of many Christians"
1987 Pope John Paul II holds a controversial Vatican meeting with Kurt Waldheim, President of Austria. The meeting causes an international uproar because of Waldheim's reputation as a willing bureaucratic accomplice under the Nazis
1988 The Pontifical Commission "Justice and Peace" issues a document on racism: "Amongst the manifestations of systematic racial distrust, specific mention must once again be made of anti-Semitism. If anti-Semitism has been the most tragic form that racist ideology has assumed in our century, with the horrors of the Jewish 'Holocaust,' it has unfortunately not yet entirely disappeared"
1989 Reacting to Jewish efforts to remove a Carmelite convent established at Auschwitz, Cardinal Glemp, the Primate of Poland, says in an August homily: "Dear Jews, do not talk with us from the position of a nation raised beyond all others and do not dictate terms that are impossible to fulfill. Don't you see, esteemed Jews, that openly opposing the Carmelite nuns hurts the feelings of all Poles and violates our hard-won sovereignty. Your power is in the mass media, at your immediate disposal in many countries. Do not use it to spread anti-Polonism." The convent was eventually removed.
1993 The Holy See establishes diplomatic relations with the State of Israel
1994 Pope John Paul II hosts a concert at the Vatican to commemorate the Holocaust. It is the first time that the Chief Rabbi of Rome is invited to co-officiate at a public function in the Vatican; the first time a Jewish cantor sings at the Vatican; the first time the Vatican choir sings a Hebrew text in performance
1994-1995 Bishops in Hungary, Germany, Poland, Netherlands, and the United States issue documents condemning antisemitism on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Holocaust
1997 The French Catholic Bishops issue a Declaration of Repentance: "The end result is that the attempt to exterminate the Jewish people, instead of being perceived as a central question in human and spiritual terms, remained a secondary consideration. In the face of so great and utter a tragedy, too many of the Church's pastors committed an offense, by their silence, against the Church itself and its mission. Today we confess that such a silence was a sin. In so doing, we recognize that the Church of France failed in her mission as teacher of consciences"
1997 The Swiss Catholic Bishops' Conference issue a document on the role of Switzerland during the Second World War: "For centuries, Christians and ecclesiastical teachings were guilty of persecuting and marginalizing Jews, thus giving rise to antisemitic sentiments... It is in reference to these past acts of churches for which we proclaim ourselves culpable and ask pardon of the descendants of the victims"
1998 The Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews issues the document We Remember: A Reflection on the 'Shoah': "We wish to turn awareness of past sins into a firm resolve to build a new future in which there will be no more anti-Judaism among Christians or anti-Christian sentiment among Jews, but rather a shared mutual respect as befits those who adore the one Creator and Lord and have a common father in faith, Abraham"
1998 The Italian Bishops address a letter to the Jewish community of Italy, expressing the "hope that the maleficent plant of antisemitism will be extinguished forever from history, beginning with our cultural and linguistic habits"
2000 Pope John Paul II visits Israel. He pays tribute to the victims of the Holocaust at Yad Vashem (the Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority), and he leaves the following prayer between the ancient stones of the Western Wall in Jerusalem:
God of our fathers, you chose Abraham and his descendants to bring your Name to the Nations: we are deeply saddened by the behavior of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood with the people of the Covenant

​

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Most of the housing plans include the home lighting as well as the flooring arrangements. A popular choice is laminate flooring. Then majority is getting garden furniture as well these days.

​

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.