wHAT ARE THE SIMILARRIES BETWEEN SAMSON AND AGONSTES AND JESUS OF MONTREAL?
402352
they are both psychos
1112488
I'm not sure what the relationship between the two of them was, but Augustin made reference to him in one of his letters. Augustin made reference to Vendicianus (a physician) in order to draw out an analogy of God's dealings with mankind in the Old & New Covenants.  In his analogy, the levitical sacrificial system was God's "prescription" for what was necessary at that place and time.  However, a new prescription has been instituted (the new covenent of Christ's atonement).  Therefore the old prescription is no longer valid --indeed it is harmful when applied.
443432
NOPE HE IS NOT THE SON OF MAN.. JESUS WAS JUST A JEWISH GUY THAT RAN AROUND DOING TORAH TEACHINGS AND WAS GREATLY MISUNDERSTOOD.
872600
Matisyahu! I have his live CD and King Without a Crown. Good stuff, you should check him out.
462270
In popular thought the two are the same.  But, in fact, the equation is based on a mistake, as almost all scholars (conservative and liberal alike) will tell you.\n\nSatan is, of course, the great angelic rebel, leader of the rebel angels and accuser of God's people.  (His role is not as clearly developed in the Old Testament -- we only see him three times [1 Chronicles 21, Job 1-2 and Zechariah 3].)\n\nOn the other hand, the name "Lucifer"  --in the Bible at least-- refers to someone else.  The name or title is the Latin translation for the "Day Star" in Isaiah 14.   And the  prophecy itself specifically says it is about the King of Babylon.  \n\nNote the setting -- God has just been talking about the captivity into which the King of Babylon will take Israel (as happened in 586 BC) and the promise of their return.  Then he turns to pronounce his JUDGMENT on this arrogant king and enemy of his people.\n\nThe prophecy is mostly a description of how this lofty king  is brought down to the GRAVE.   There he is greeted by other dead kings marvel that even this mighty king has been brought down, just like them!  NONE of this fits the idea that this character is Satan or symbol for him.\n\nThe basis for the misunderstanding is the HIGH language used to describe this person (e.g., "Day Star") and his lofty position.  They look at this language and think it is inappropriate to a mere human being.   But that is exactly the POINT!!    In fact, this was just the sort of language Near Eastern kings, who considered themselves sons of the gods,  used about THEMSELVES. Its use in this passage is to MOCK the king and his pretension.\n\nSomething very similar happens in a prophecy against the King of Tyre in Ezekiel 28.  Again the passage specifically TELLS us it is about the King of Tyre.  Ezekiel's language is based on a poetic description of the exalted position of the first man (Adam) who lived in God's presence (in Eden) and the clothing of a high priest (simlar to that found in Exodus 28-29).\n\nIn other words, these passages are talking about HUMAN pride and rebellion.  It may indeed resemble the rebellion of the being we konw as Satan, but these passages are NOT about Satan.
786509
It is NOT the unforgiveable sin. Samson committed suicide and is mentioned in the Hebrews hall of faith (chapter 11).......only being UNSAVED is unforgivable!\n\nYou're very preoccupied with this; 2 of my brothers committed suicide. Please email me if you'd like to talk.
371185
Saint James the Just (יעקב "Holder of the heel; supplanter"; Standard Hebrew Yaʿaqov, Tiberian Hebrew Yaʿăqōḇ), also called James Adelphos or the Brother of the Lord and sometimes identified with James the Lesser, (died AD 62) was an important figure in Early Christianity. According to tradition, he was the first bishop or Patriarch of Jerusalem, the author of the Epistle of James in the New Testament, and the first of the Seventy of Luke 10:1-20. Paul of Tarsus in Galatians 2:9 (KJV) characterized James as such: "... James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars..." He is described in the New Testament as a "brother of Jesus" and "in the Liturgy of St James, the brother of Jesus is raised to the dignity of the brother of the very God (Adelphotheos)"
91863
Yeshua is the name called Jesus today.\nChrist (Kristos)is the title referring to the saviour.
1096762
Well, that would require a 100 page essay to list all the differences, and a major history language.\n\nBoth would be preferred , at least by me, over Roman Orthodox, but I would say Coptic would be closer to what the church was like after Jesus' death/Resurrection.
170220
Jesus was the opposite of a fundamentalist.  He was a liberal Jew.  You are right, he did take a more liberal view of the Torah, he taught that although it may have been the way and the truth in the past, but times they were a' changing.  He was revolutionary (in that he changed things drastically) but I don't think he was ever fundamentalist.  It is a few of those who have come since who have twisted his teachings into something different.
1016380
Jews! Jesus was a Jew. \nChristianity came from a mix of Judiasm and Paganism...
769310
Scripture references Jesus as a man... He is called the "Son of God".....\n\nThat's how I know him......\n\n\nyour sister,\nGinger
350299
Messiah is the anglicised form of Mashiach which is Hebrew for anointed. \nChrist is the anglicised form of Christos which is Greek for anointed.\nThe Old Testament was written mainly in Hebrew (a few parts in Aramaic), and the New Testament was written in Greek. \n\nJesus (Greek Iesous) is a transliteration of Joshua (Hebrew Yehoshua) which means the Lord saves.\n\nJesus was his name and Christ/Messiah was his title. \n\nMatthew 1:20-21 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."\n\nJudea & Galilee had been part of the Greek Empire, and was occupied by the Romans at the time Jesus was living there, many of the people would speak Aramaic, but read and discuss the scriptures in Hebrew, so several languages were being used at the same time. This explains why sometimes \n\np.s. some Latin names end in us e.g. Marcus, Julius, Augustus.
439957
Um, do you mean Jesus and Judas? You can read it for yourself at www.nationalgeographic.com. It is believed to be the work of gnostics, and not of Judas. A fairy tale.
519620
Moses spoke to god face to face, "as a man speaketh".  Stephen saw Jesus "even on the right hand of god".  Many have throughout the bible and modern times.  They have made thorough descriptions.\n\nTry this link:\nhttp://www.mormon.org/learn/0,8672,959-1,00.html
478668
You have to read the New Testament Apocrypha to find anything regarding Jesus' younger years. Note that none of these are accepted as canonical.\n\nGospel of Pseudo-Matthew (also called the Birth of Mary and Infancy of the Saviour) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Pseudo-Matthew\nwhich is based on \n\nProtevangelion of James (also called the Gospel of James) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protevangelion_of_James \n\nInfancy Gospel of Thomas (not to be confused with the Gospel of Thomas) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infancy_Gospel_of_Thomas\n\nLife of John the Baptist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_of_John_the_Baptist\n\nHistory of Joseph the Carpenter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Joseph_the_Carpenter\n\nArabic Infancy Gospel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_Infancy_Gospel\n\nLibellus de Nativitate Sanctae Mariae (also named as the Nativity of Mary) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libellus_de_Nativitate_Sanctae_Mariae
666369
Yes it does appear that Christians and Jews borrowed some of the Egyptians ideas, there are similarities between the 10 commandments and the Egyptian book of the dead, the story of Jesus and the story of Horus, and there is even a theory that has a strong point of argument that Moses was actually the Egyptian prince Tuthmosis or the Pharaoh Amenhotep IV.  Tuthmosis was supposedly a prince during the rule of the pharaoh Akhenanten.  This was Amenhotep IV who changed his name to Akhenanten and who tried to change the Egyptian culture by declaring that from then on there was only one true god, Aten, and that Amen-Ra and the other gods should no longer be worshiped.  Apparently this idea was not embraced by the majority of Egypt.