A heretical teaching dismantled with the help of Paul the Evangelist.

[Sigma]

Knowing a guy, (Hegesippus who said James and Jesus were cousins), who knew a guy, who knew a guy, who knew the pope, according to “lost” papers, but the tradition lives on in Catholic Doctrine…:rollleyes:

Papias of Hierapolis [c. 60–130 AD] indicated "Apostle James of Alphaeus" and "James the bishop of Jerusalem" were the same person, as well as the brother [sibling] of Simon, Joseph, and Jude (Judas/Thaddeus), and that these four were the sons of Mary and Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas). (Fragments of Papias, Frag. 10)

Jerome of Stridon [c. 347–420 CE] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Less," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said this James was the son of Jesus's mother's sister, Mary the wife of Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas, cf. Jn. 19:25), which coincides with Papias's testimony, and thus Jerome would've known he was Apostle James of Alphaeus as well. (De Viris Illustribus, De Perpetua Uirginitate Beatae Mariae)

Eusebius of Caesarea [c. 260–340 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Just," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said, "Apostle Paul makes mention of the same James the Just, where he writes, 'Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.'" (Historia Ecclesiastica, Bk. I, ch. 23, Bk. II, ch. 1)

Clement of Alexandria [c. 150–215 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypotyposes, Bk. VII)

Flavius Josephus [c. 37-100 CE] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Antiquitates Iudaicae, Bk. XX, ch. 9)

Hegesippus [c. 110-180 AD] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypomnemata)

The scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources, even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively show that James in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3;apostle James of Alphaeus; James the Less; James the Just; James the bishop of Jerusalem; James "the brother of the Lord;" and the author of the Epistle of James were the same person, and the son of Joseph's brother, Alphaeus, and his wife Mary of Cleophas (Clopas/Alpaheus), and thus he and his siblings Simon, Joseph, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins.​

No way to verify.

Incorrect. In my thread Were they Jesus's siblings?, the testimonies are supported by the scriptural verses I've cited. And, how did you verify every testimony in all the books that make up the Bible?

 

[Taken]

Papias of Hierapolis [c. 60–130 AD] indicated "Apostle James of Alphaeus" and "James the bishop of Jerusalem" were the same person, as well as the brother [sibling] of Simon, Joseph, and Jude (Judas/Thaddeus), and that these four were the sons of Mary and Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas). (Fragments of Papias, Frag. 10)

Jerome of Stridon [c. 347–420 CE] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Less," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said this James was the son of Jesus's mother's sister, Mary the wife of Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas, cf. Jn. 19:25), which coincides with Papias's testimony, and thus Jerome would've known he was Apostle James of Alphaeus as well. (De Viris Illustribus, De Perpetua Uirginitate Beatae Mariae)

Eusebius of Caesarea [c. 260–340 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Just," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said, "Apostle Paul makes mention of the same James the Just, where he writes, 'Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.'" (Historia Ecclesiastica, Bk. I, ch. 23, Bk. II, ch. 1)

Clement of Alexandria [c. 150–215 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypotyposes, Bk. VII)

Flavius Josephus [c. 37-100 CE] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Antiquitates Iudaicae, Bk. XX, ch. 9)

Hegesippus [c. 110-180 AD] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypomnemata)

The scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources, even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively show that James in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3;apostle James of Alphaeus; James the Less; James the Just; James the bishop of Jerusalem; James "the brother of the Lord;" and the author of the Epistle of James were the same person, and the son of Joseph's brother, Alphaeus, and his wife Mary of Cleophas (Clopas/Alpaheus), and thus he and his siblings Simon, Joseph, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins.​

Incorrect. In my thread Were they Jesus's siblings?, the testimonies are supported by the scriptural verses I've cited. And, how did you verify every testimony in all the books that make up the Bible?

You have quoted indications of men who wrote their indications….what some 400 years after Jesus’ death? why would I consider their testimony?

 

[Sigma]

You have quoted indications of men who wrote their indications….what some 400 years after Jesus’ death? why would I consider their testimony?

I put each's birth and death date next to their name, so I don't know how you came to the conclusion of 400 years. If you look at them, you'll see their testimones were written either between decades after Jesus's death, to a couple hundred years after His death, for most of them. What's your excuse now for not wanting to consider their testimonies?

No way to verify.

So, how did you verify every testimony in all the books that make up the Bible?

 

[Marymog]

The LIGHT of Scripture was shown you in Post #107

Lol...Hold on!!! HOLD ON!!! You are cracking me up

Here is what you said in Post #107: Joseph and Mary FULLY participated in God's Commandment to have SEX = "Be fruitful and multiply" = according to the will of God
Joseph impregnated Mary according to God's Commandment: "Do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife"
Doctrines of demons (heresy) is found throughout Roman Catholicism, such as: "Commanding not marry"
1 Timothy 4:1-5
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

God telling Joseph to take Mary as his wife IS NOT A COMMAND TO HAVE SEX!! That is a twisted interpretation of Scripture that your men have taught you!!

The two 'be fruitful and multiply" passages from Scripture ARE NOT ASSOCIATED TO MARRIAGE! Both passages refer to filling or replenishing the earth with people.....Read them before falsely commenting on them.

1 Timothy 4 COULD APPLY TO YOU, but you are so blinded by the lies your men have told you can't see that.

Furthermore..................Show me the teaching that the Catholic Church has a doctrine "Commanding not marry". I asked you that same question in post #125 AND YOU DIDN'T ANSWER. Why???? BECAUSE IT'S a LIE kiddo!!

There is NO, NONE, ZILCH, NADDA "light of Scripture" in your post. There is only twisting of Scripture and flat out lies.

 

[David in NJ]

Lol...Hold on!!! HOLD ON!!! You are cracking me up

Here is what you said in Post #107: Joseph and Mary FULLY participated in God's Commandment to have SEX = "Be fruitful and multiply" = according to the will of God
Joseph impregnated Mary according to God's Commandment: "Do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife"
Doctrines of demons (heresy) is found throughout Roman Catholicism, such as: "Commanding not marry"
1 Timothy 4:1-5
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

God telling Joseph to take Mary as his wife IS NOT A COMMAND TO HAVE SEX!! That is a twisted interpretation of Scripture that your men have taught you!!

The two 'be fruitful and multiply" passages from Scripture ARE NOT ASSOCIATED TO MARRIAGE! Both passages refer to filling or replenishing the earth with people.....Read them before falsely commenting on them.

1 Timothy 4 COULD APPLY TO YOU, but you are so blinded by the lies your men have told you can't see that.

Furthermore..................Show me the teaching that the Catholic Church has a doctrine "Commanding not marry". I asked you that same question in post #125 AND YOU DIDN'T ANSWER. Why???? BECAUSE IT'S a LIE kiddo!!

There is NO, NONE, ZILCH, NADDA "light of Scripture" in your post. There is only twisting of Scripture and flat out lies.

Complete blindness

 

[Marymog]

Again, you and Sigma are yet to provide one spiritual insight into your teaching.

Not one Marymog - and how many pages in this thread has this request been made?

Yep!

I don't even know what you mean by "spiritual insight into your teaching"! That make zero sense in regards to the subject matter!!

@Sigma and I have clearly articulated why we believe what we believe and have backed up with Scripture and Christian history. You have articulated your point of view and backed up with your opinion. THE END!! I don't know what more there is to say.....You have made it clear that whatever we say it will not be good enough for you......You pre-emptively struck down anything that Sigma was going to say in the future by stating to another forum member "Sigma really "excited" to dump more garb on the forum!" ...........Sooooo what more is there to discuss F2F??? You have already decided that nothing we say is good enough for you and its garbage! You are biased!!

At no point and at no time does Scripture ever say that Mary had other children nor does Scripture name those children. If it said that you would have posted it by now. You haven't. The earliest historical Christian writing (YES, your own Christian history F2F) we have said she did not have other children. You add to Scripture and reject you own Christian history.


I take that back....you don't reject Christian history. Your Christian history starts 500 years ago...you accept that Protestant history.!!


Keeping it real...Mary

 

[Marymog]

Complete blindness

I am trying to help you see David....but your hatred for The Church is blinding you!!

If you really believe that what you stated in post #107 is "The light of Scripture" then I am concerned for you and your puffed-up self-importance. You are boastful, proud and conceited (2 Timothy 3:1-5). And you fulfil 2 Peter 3:16


Seeing it all now...Mary

 

[Marymog]

That's the issue, you both are yet to explain what matters and why lol :cool:

Lol...oh goodness. Comedy hour has begun!!

 

[Sigma]

Complete blindness

You're the one twisting Scripture, telling lies, ignoring our logical arguments, and yet WE'RE the ones who are "blind"...lol

 

[David in NJ]

I am trying to help you see David....but your hatred for The Church is blinding you!!

If you really believe that what you stated in post #107 is "The light of Scripture" then I am concerned for you and your puffed-up self-importance. You are boastful, proud and conceited (2 Timothy 3:1-5). And you fulfil 2 Peter 3:16


Seeing it all now...Mary

i will boast in the LORD and His Word

The Holy Spirit will correct all opposition to the Word

God will judge idolators = Mary worshippers

 

[Sigma]

i will boast in the LORD and His Word

I think I speak for @Marymog and other Catholics on this forum when I say we don't care how "futile" discussing this topic may be with whomever, for the simple reason that our position is True, we've shown it to be so, and we'll never turn down an opportunity to defend that Truth. That's having conviction in a position, and although we may say others are wrong in theirs, it's that they believe they're right, so it's foreign to me to see them defend their position so hard, yet so lazily at the same time.

However, no one's conviction should be based on pride. By that I mean, no one should stand firm on a position, despite knowing it's false, or at the very least knowing they can't reasonably defend it, because they refuse to concede to the opposing side out of pride. So, let your conviction in your own position on this topic be a sincere one.

Throughout discussing this topic of Jesus's "siblings," there's numerous examples where @Marymog and I's logical arguments, or a simple question, go ignored by a protestant, and thus we have to repeat ourselves in the hopes of getting a reply, and they shift to anti-Catholic polemics, etc., whenever they're on the ropes. If your position on this topic was true, then why do those things? Have you and others taken time to really meditate on that?

 

[David in NJ]

I think I speak for @Marymog and other Catholics on this forum when I say we don't care how "futile" discussing this topic may be with whomever, for the simple reason that our position is True, we've shown it to be so, and we'll never turn down an opportunity to defend that Truth. That's having conviction in a position, and although we may say others are wrong in theirs, it's that they believe they're right, so it's foreign to me to see them defend their position so hard, yet so lazily at the same time.

However, no one's conviction should be based on pride. By that I mean, no one should stand firm on a position, despite knowing it's false, or at the very least knowing they can't reasonably defend it, because they refuse to concede to the opposing side out of pride. So, let your conviction in your own position on this topic be a sincere one.

Throughout discussing this topic of Jesus's "siblings," there's numerous examples where @Marymog and I's logical arguments, or a simple question, go ignored by a protestant, and thus we have to repeat ourselves in the hopes of getting a reply, and they shift to anti-Catholic polemics, etc., whenever they're on the ropes. If your position on this topic was true, then why do those things? Have you and others taken time to really meditate on that?

“… Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, on the day of testing in the wilderness … Therefore I was provoked with that generation, and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart; they have not known my ways.’ As I swore in my wrath, ‘They shall not enter my rest.’”
Hebrews 3:7-8, 10-11 (ESV)

 

[Marymog]

Wrong again . and i also do bible reads with others too . and we all are coming into simple agreement of the TRUTH .
NOW FLEE THE HARLOTS DEN . I say this not to be mean but out of great love and good desire
for your soul . SHE is a harlot of harlots and she is not alone . The harlot has infected most all of the protestant realm as well
as well as the kings of the earth . the presidents do her bidding , the churches in large do her bidding
the false religions have even come to rest under her shade . SHE IS A HARLOT and SHE has infected the world to unify as one .
I shun all her doctrine to hell if i could . Not the people under her spell , no i wish they would flee her .
BUT HER ALL INCLUSIVE HEALING THE WOUND FALSE LOVE UNIFYER of the religoins and world
I AM GONNA EXPOSE EVERY LAST WORD of her and her co workers who do her biding . COME YE OUT FROM AMONST
them , learn those bibles my friends . LEARN that doctrine well .

LOL...Ok amigo. You and @David in NJ agree on everything in Scripture and you both know the Truth....

AND the harlot has infected most all of the protestant churches also Sooo which ones hasn't the harlot infected?

Obviously, YOU know the Truth because YOU know that The Catholic Church is wrong in its teaching along with "most all of the protestant realm".....If you KNOW what they are teaching is not the truth then you MUST KNOW what the truth is! RIGHT???

Please amigo....Enlighten all of us with your wisdom. @Taken and @Marvelloustime "like" what you wrote....Even though I am willing to bet the three of you wouldn't agree on salvation doctrine when it comes to right down to it....Now would you 3 amigos???

Keeping it real....Mary

 

[Marymog]

“… Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, on the day of testing in the wilderness … Therefore I was provoked with that generation, and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart; they have not known my ways.’ As I swore in my wrath, ‘They shall not enter my rest.’”
Hebrews 3:7-8, 10-11 (ESV)

And what does this have to do with your lack of evidence for what you believe or your Pride?

 

[Marymog]

i will boast in the LORD and His Word

The Holy Spirit will correct all opposition to the Word

God will judge idolators = Mary worshippers

@Sigma and I have corrected you soooooooo you are right. The Holy Spirit will correct all opposition to the Word!

Repeating a lie (Mary worship) doesn't make it true. We, like Jesus and God, love, honor and respect the Mother of God who is 'blessed among women'.


Keeping it real....Mary

 

[Sigma]

Take a good look at the following @David in NJ and others:

Papias of Hierapolis [c. 60–130 AD] indicated "Apostle James of Alphaeus" and "James the bishop of Jerusalem" were the same person, as well as the brother [sibling] of Simon, Joseph, and Jude (Judas/Thaddeus), and that these four were the sons of Mary and Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas). (Fragments of Papias, Frag. 10)

Jerome of Stridon [c. 347–420 CE] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Less," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said this James was the son of Jesus's mother's sister, Mary the wife of Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas, cf. Jn. 19:25), which coincides with Papias's testimony, and thus Jerome would've known he was Apostle James of Alphaeus as well. (De Viris Illustribus, De Perpetua Uirginitate Beatae Mariae)

Eusebius of Caesarea [c. 260–340 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Just," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said, "Apostle Paul makes mention of the same James the Just, where he writes, 'Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.'" (Historia Ecclesiastica, Bk. I, ch. 23, Bk. II, ch. 1)

Clement of Alexandria [c. 150–215 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypotyposes, Bk. VII)

Flavius Josephus [c. 37-100 CE] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Antiquitates Iudaicae, Bk. XX, ch. 9)

Hegesippus [c. 110-180 AD] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypomnemata)

The scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources, even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively show that James in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3;apostle James of Alphaeus; James the Less; James the Just; James the bishop of Jerusalem; James "the brother of the Lord;" and the author of the Epistle of James were the same person, and the son of Joseph's brother, Alphaeus, and his wife Mary of Cleophas (Clopas/Alpaheus), and thus he and his siblings Simon, Joseph, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins.​

In my thread Were they Jesus's siblings?, these testimonies and the crossover agreement between all my sources above, even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively show that James in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3;apostle James of Alphaeus; James the Less; James the Just; James the bishop of Jerusalem; James "the brother of the Lord;" and the author of the Epistle of James were the same person, and the son of Joseph's brother, Alphaeus, and his wife Mary of Cleophas (Clopas/Alpaheus), and thus he and his siblings Simon, Joseph, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins.

All you have been provided in an attempt to defend your belief they were Jesus's siblings is reading verses about Jesus's brothers, and assume they were His siblings, as well taking verses out of context, either by inserting words that weren't originally there, or assuming the meaning of phrases without evidence for it. Then, when asked to do the work to actually prove all your claims, you and others refuse! Why? because you can't, yet you continue to claim you can, and that you're right, because you also refuse to concede to Catholics. You'd rather abandon reason than do that. Where's the spiritual benefit in that??

Again, look at the difference between you all and myself and other Catholics! Look at how we did the work and can provide substantial content, not assumptions and twisting of Scripture.

I understand its difficult admitting you're wrong in a belief, especially to a Catholic, but that's pride and Catholics aren't the ones who caused that. Your own people did.

 

[David in NJ]

Take a good look at the following @David in NJ and others:

Papias of Hierapolis [c. 60–130 AD] indicated "Apostle James of Alphaeus" and "James the bishop of Jerusalem" were the same person, as well as the brother [sibling] of Simon, Joseph, and Jude (Judas/Thaddeus), and that these four were the sons of Mary and Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas). (Fragments of Papias, Frag. 10)

Jerome of Stridon [c. 347–420 CE] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Less," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said this James was the son of Jesus's mother's sister, Mary the wife of Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas, cf. Jn. 19:25), which coincides with Papias's testimony, and thus Jerome would've known he was Apostle James of Alphaeus as well. (De Viris Illustribus, De Perpetua Uirginitate Beatae Mariae)

Eusebius of Caesarea [c. 260–340 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem," "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Just," and the "author of the Epistle of James," were the same person. He also said, "Apostle Paul makes mention of the same James the Just, where he writes, 'Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.'" (Historia Ecclesiastica, Bk. I, ch. 23, Bk. II, ch. 1)

Clement of Alexandria [c. 150–215 AD] indicated "James the bishop of Jerusalem" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypotyposes, Bk. VII)

Flavius Josephus [c. 37-100 CE] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Antiquitates Iudaicae, Bk. XX, ch. 9)

Hegesippus [c. 110-180 AD] indicated "James the brother of the Lord" and "James the Just" were the same person. (Hypomnemata)

The scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources, even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively show that James in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3;apostle James of Alphaeus; James the Less; James the Just; James the bishop of Jerusalem; James "the brother of the Lord;" and the author of the Epistle of James were the same person, and the son of Joseph's brother, Alphaeus, and his wife Mary of Cleophas (Clopas/Alpaheus), and thus he and his siblings Simon, Joseph, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins.​

In my thread Were they Jesus's siblings?, these testimonies and the crossover agreement between all my sources above, even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively show that James in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3;apostle James of Alphaeus; James the Less; James the Just; James the bishop of Jerusalem; James "the brother of the Lord;" and the author of the Epistle of James were the same person, and the son of Joseph's brother, Alphaeus, and his wife Mary of Cleophas (Clopas/Alpaheus), and thus he and his siblings Simon, Joseph, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins.

All you have been provided in an attempt to defend your belief they were Jesus's siblings is reading verses about Jesus's brothers, and assume they were His siblings, as well taking verses out of context, either by inserting words that weren't originally there, or assuming the meaning of phrases without evidence for it. Then, when asked to do the work to actually prove all your claims, you and others refuse! Why? because you can't, yet you continue to claim you can, and that you're right, because you also refuse to concede to Catholics. You'd rather abandon reason than do that. Where's the spiritual benefit in that??

Again, look at the difference between you all and myself and other Catholics! Look at how we did the work and can provide substantial content, not just assumptions and twisting of Scripture.

i do not follow 'bishops' or such as you desire

i follow the WORD and His Apostles and Prophets, who by the Power of the Holy Spirit, wrote down the words of God by which i LIVE

 

[Sigma]

i follow the WORD and His Apostles and Prophets, who by the Power of the Holy Spirit, wrote down the words of God by which i LIVE

If that were True, you'd see God's Word doesn't support your belief Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) weren't Jesus's siblings.

 

[Marymog]

I love the freedom of not being religious. I am free to love Jesus without all the traditions and rituals.

What does that mean..... you love Not being religious? Christianity is religious sooooo you're not a Christian????

If you loved Jesus, like you say you do, then you would adhere to 2 Thessalonians 2:15 instead of saying you can do without it. If you loved Jesus then you would participate in the ritual of baptism and participate in His Last Supper with your fellow Christians like He told you to do. But you don't need rituals and traditions.....do you? Why? What man taught you that?

The most confounding and funny thing is that @David in NJ "liked" your heretical post. Weird. Just plain weird.....

Curious Mary

 

[Taken]

So, how did you verify every testimony in all the books that make up the Bible?

I believe the inspired Word of God is Truth, is spread throughout the Scriptures, inasmuch as men became spread throughout the Earth.
Being in my perspective the Scripture is Truth, is Just, and interprets, validates and verifies itself.

I’m sure there were men in ancient days WHO could write, had beliefs, had opinions about their beliefs, spoke them, wrote them, and no different today, men do the same.

Bottom line, the mention of multiple people named IN Scripture, even some having the Same NAMES…
NONE stand Greater, IS Exalted ABOVE ALL, IS Scripturally taught to CALL OUT TO, Pray TO, Worship, Revere, Adore, except the ONE God SENT;
Expressly Called by the name JESUS, and revealed He IS the CHRIST.

Jesus chose 12 men to follow him, learn from him, and ultimately commit to him.
11 of the 12 succeeded.

Many individuals on different occasions gathered to hear Jesus speak.
In the different gathered listening crowds;
Some were in wonderment, some astounded, some amazed, some believing what they heard and saw, some scoffing, some eager to hear more, some walking away with their personal opinions that Jesus was simply another story teller, or had the spirit of a devil.

Jesus’ gatherings increased, implying His gaining of popularity, AND became a major Threat to the established PREACHERS … thus multiple PLOTS were instigated (by the “head” PREACHERS) in an attempt to DISCREDIT Jesus, and SWAY People AWAY from listening to Him, or Consider His Preaching as Valid.

Scripture reveals, Some listened, followed the Discrediting Preachers. Some heard the Discrediting Preachers, and Discredited THEM, and Continued WITH their Trust and Following and Standing WITH and FOR; JESUS. Nothing Different To this Day.

People today, Assemble, (in a park, a home, a building, wherever)…Hear the Speaker, FOR or AGAINST Christ Jesus’ teaching….AND Agree or Walk Away.

Numerous people are Expressly NAMED in Scripture revealing Particular Persons, WHO…Rejected Jesus,
WHO…Rejected Jesus, then understood and Accepted Jesus,
WHO…Accepted Jesus, without understanding.
WHO…Heard, didn’t understand, and rejected Him, because of not understanding.
WHO…Accepted Jesus, or Rejected Jesus BASED on the understanding of multiple mens Philosophies, and other mens understanding.

Nothing different in this day.