- List All

  • Web   The Point


+ Theology/Religion + Culture + Marriage & Family + Politics + Academia + Human Rights
Christianity Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Religion Blogs - Blog Top Sites
Link With Us - Web Directory

« The Point Radio: Family Fitness | Main | Pray for the Jollyblogger »

December 29, 2008

Stealing Jesus

Has anyone else heard about this latest bit of sacrilegious entertainment -- stealing baby Jesus figures out of nativity scenes across America? Chuck Norris's article "Jacking Jesus" explains that "skeptics might mock these defacements as negligible crimes, but stealing the soul of Nativities is one more dismal sign of a culture gone awry. What type of world do we live in when hoodlums (young and old) commit sacrilege for entertainment?"

Thank God, no one can "take away the real Jesus of history." Read the entire article for a glimpse of the real, historical Jesus who gives meaning not only to the Christmas season, but to all of life. 

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Stealing Jesus:


Paqid Yirmeyahu

A reading of Oxford historian James Parkes (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue) demonstrates that the phrase "historical Jesus" is an intractable oxymoron, the Christian-fabricated image (idols) of Jesus originating only after 135 C.E.

Researching the historical Pharisee Ribi from Natzrat and Beit Lekhem begins with Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT (Prof. Elisha Qimron), which provides the Judaic constraints within which a historical Pharisee Ribi is possible. All of the Christian displacement theology doctrines date later than 135 C.E. and owe their origins to the Hellenist Romans, NOT pre-135 C.E. Jews.

Learn history instead of regurgitated Church doctrines at www.netzarim.co.il (The Netzarim in Israel).


Shalom, Yirmeyahu. Your website says "Serving the One Almighty further dictates that, in areas of disagreement, discourse between us should be civil, respectful and tolerant; with no need to compromise on any point of truth." It also says 'Thus, for Jews, which includes the Nәtzâr•im′ , "NT" stands not for "New Testament," allowing a pass for Christians to beg the question, but for "Null Testament."'

The second quote seems to not be civil, respectful or tolerant. (Neither is much of your comment here, using words like "fabricated" and "regurgitated".) Can you explain?

Note also that the comment policy of The Point includes this: "Obscenities and spam -- including bashing, solicitations, repetitive or fraudulent comments, and comments that are irrelevant to the post under which they are written -- will not be published." Unless you or one of your flock are willing to discuss the issue of calling the NT the "Null Testament", it would appear that you have engaged in solicitation, and/or have made a comment irrelevant to the original post. It would be prudent of you to explain why your posting is neither solicitation nor irrelevant.

If you will respond to that, I will ask my question of you (which deals with your acceptance of the authority of Eusebius, who lived well after 135CE and who assented to the Nicene Creed under duress).


Heavens, a troll sighting! Not all that common around here, but I guess it can still happen. :o)


Not to worry, Darcyjo. We've learned the Deeper Magic that goes back before the Witch’s knowledge.

But I do get a bit... "exercised" over postings like this, since a family friend was pulled into a similar organization. The next thing we knew she had quit her job, sold all her possessions and moved 3,000 miles from family and friends, to be under the spiritual leadership of a "Christian Jew" who was really just Jim Jones without the Kool-aid. Our friend barely escaped with what remained of her life savings. Caveat lector.

When I read of such a "spiritual leader", I favor the idea of binding and gagging them, tying them to a tree, and pinning up their silly hat with a knife and a note. I roared at that movie scene with more than laughter.

Gina Dalfonzo

Sorry, guys, I guess I've gotten a little lax while on vacation!


You deserve every bit of laxity you can scrounge, G, so no need to apologize. Besides, I needed the exercise.


Mr. Yirmeyahu,
I appreciate your zeal for the Most High.

Since we have numerous fragments of the Gospels and the rest of haBerit haChesadah dating prior to A. D. 135, the archaeological record disagrees with your assertion.

As to "replacement theology": that is not a term used in Christian theology.

We gentile believers are as a wild olive branch grafted onto the domestic olive tree. We are the interlopers God graciously grafted in by adopting us. And we are told not to forget that "all Israel will be saved" even though there has been "a hardening in part" for a time. Yes, we do believe that we have a new covenant, a new high priest, and a new law, but that is not 'replacement' theology. That is the fulfillment of the covenant with Abraham, extended to all peoples. It does not address the covenant with Moses regarding haEretz Yisrael. It regards the forgiveness of sins, not the land.

The actual archaeological and historical record shows that indeed the followers of Jesus did understand him to be God the Son - as did His enemies, generations prior to the bar Kochva revolt. The Talmud attests to this.

The comments to this entry are closed.