Weiss says the find sheds light on life during those times. "It shows that pagans who were a minority prayed in the center of the city and lived in harmony with the Jewish majority," he says. The fact that a pagan Roman centre of worship was discovered when Romans controlled the land? Could the Jews of the time object to this foreign implant? Especially after the failure of the revolt. What was the revolt about if not objecting to the heathens and their idol worship on Jewish land? Tell me a pagan structure of worship existed under Jewish sovreignity like King David, Solomon and others then perhaps he may have an argument. "He says a church was built on top of the temple in the 5th century." The early church on the Temple Mount was built by Emperor Constantines mother, ie under control of the Romans. From that he wishes to imply how peacefull Jews lived with others? Werent most exiled by then. Hes talking gobeldygook and trying to instill his own agenda.

I wonder if Weiss has his marbles together.... maybe his next statement will be directed against the revolt of Maccabies? After all - bowing to idols (as "worshipping together") is not such a radical ideal ..... If Judah Maccabi only knew what Weiss knows..! Our history could've been totally different.

A roman temple from the period of roman occupation (military occupation) proves Jews lived in harmony with pagans. All evidence is equivicable and conclusions must be based on a preponderance of the evidence in relation to actual circumstances. We have a great deal of documentation, both Roman and Jewish from that era, and relations were far from harmonious - with religious tensions being the foremost problem between romans and jews. In fact, it was during the period of judges and prophets that we see Jews setting up pagan temples and the like, not the second temple era. This researches claims are utter nonsense.

It was the rabid Hellenist Yehoshua Ben-Shimon (II) Ben-Tzadoq (Hellenized to "Jason"), who, in collusion with Antiochus IV Epiphanes (c. BCE 215-164), king of (BCE 175-164) Syria, usurped -- *and first Hellenized* -- the office of High Priest from his righteous brother and last authentic Ben-Tzadoq High Priest -- the Mori Tzedeq (Righteous Teacher), Khonyo Ben-Shimon (II) Ben-Tzadoq (Hellenized to "Onias" III). This Hellenizing became particularly conspicuous when Prof. Qimron published his authoritative and seminal work on Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT. But it has been well documented for years. The Ency. Jud. informed, years ago, that the initial Hellenization of the "Temple priesthood" occurred in B.C.E. 175, though suspended for a time by the Makabim. Long before the 2nd century C.E., Alexander Yanai Ben-Aharon the High Priest (B.C.E. 103-76) is likely the individual who finally and permanently Hellenized the "Temple priesthood," expelling the anti-Hellenist faithful Sadducees (whom we know today as Qumran Essenes) from the "Temple," after which the "Temple" was controlled and populated solely by Hellenist pseudo-Sadducees (to distinguish the followers of "Jason," the "Wicked Priest," from the faithful Qumran Sadducees who followed Khonyo as the Mori Tzedeq)-- the same Sadducees who, in an illegal court in collusion with their Hellenist Roman occupier-puppeteers, falsely convicted Ribi Yehoshua, the leading (anti-Hellenist) Pharisee Ribi at the very time the Pharisees were, for the first time, achieving predominance over the Hellenist pseudo-Sadducees in the "Great Sanhedrin": "It is noteworthy in this regard that Gamlieil was the first to be called by the title of Rabban (inter alia Ernest Klein, The Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Speakers of English, p. 603), suggesting that he was the first of something and strongly intimating that he was the first leader of the Perushim to wrest control of the Beit Din ha-Gadol from the pseudo-Tzedoqim to become Nasi" (Ben-David, The Chronology of the Tanakh from the "Big Bang"). However, it is entirely misleading to suggest, as the headline of the Ynet article does, that "Jews, pagans lived in harmony." They did NOT!!! *Hellenist* pseudo-Sadducees loved the *Hellenist* Roman occupiers. But the Torah-faithful, Qumran Sadducees and Pharisees were uncompromisingly anti-Hellenist; so much so that the rabbis forbade eating or any social interaction with the Roman occupiers--the reason the Netzarim first formulated the Noakhide Laws (see Encyclopedia Judaica ("Noachide Laws," 12:1190ff) and www.netzarim.co.il/Shared/Bnei-Noakh XML.htm) so that geirim could interact enough to be taught to practice Torah fully and non-selectively, converting whenever qualified. As a leading Pharisee Ribi, this is what made Ribi Yehoshua so threatening and dangerous to the Hellenist pseudo-Sadducees and the control of the Hellenist Roman occupiers. THAT'S why he was convicted on trumped up false charges in an illegal kangaroo Hellenist pseudo-Sadducee "beit din" and turned over to the Roman occupiers with their (Hellenist pseudo-Sadducees, NOT "the Jews'") endorsement to execute him. It seems inevitable that the both the Qumran Sadducees and the Pharisees regarded these Hellenist pseudo-Sadducees of the "Temple" as "Wicked Priests"; heirs of *the* "Wicked Priest": Yehoshua Ben-Shimon (II) Ben-Tzadoq (Hellenized to "Jason"). For more info see: www.netzarim.co.il/Calendar/Khanukah.htm#MorihaTzedeq Paqid Yirmeyahu Paqid 16, The Netzarim Israeli Orthodox Jew (Teimani Baladi Dardai) Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

What has Israeli archeology come to? The Roman Peace existed everywhere, PROVIDED the local inhabitants honored Rome and worshiped Caesar . They were allowed to keep their local deities, but they were subservient to the conquerors. The Jews, and the Jews alone, resisted the Roman protocol, ultimately leading to the destruction of Israel and the scattering of the local Jewish population out of Israel for the next 2000 years. This politically correct hogwash is nonsense.

Roman Emperor Constantine I established Roman Catholic Church in 325 AD. During the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD (from May 20 till June 19) he ordered the Gospels of John, Matthew, Mark and Luke to be adjusted -- so as not to contradict each other. All the other Gospels were burned ON the order of Emperor Constantine -- and its followers (of the other Gospels) were persecuted by the order of Emperor Constantine. Thus in 325 AD, Roman Catholicism became the State religion of the entire Roman Empire -- on the order of Emperor Constantine. Whereas before 313 AD, the followers of Lord Jesus Christ were harassed, beaten, persecuted, thrown to the lions to be eaten, hanged, killed by the consecutive Roman Emperors -- starting from 33 AD. Quote :".. the 2nd century (Roman) temple was found ..". In the Second Century the Romans were not yet Christians -- they were killers of Christians. WHY the Romans did not like the Christians ? Because the Christians preached that one should NOT worship (the many) gods -- but that everyone SHOULD worship God, the Supreme Lord, and God alone. The Romans did not like to hear that -- so they (i.e. the Romans) killed them (i.e. the Christians).

There was no JC there was no crucification, there were no martyrs, there were no apostles, there were no Pauls or Peters or anyone all myth, legend, noone ever lived so noone ever died, there were no early christians, there were no ealry popes, all lies, and again there were no martyrs, christians were the barbarians and most of all there was no story and there were no Jews involved because it was all fake, a fabrication.

After reading your post.... it is evident that you need to have your meds increased. SInce we both live in NYC... I can recommend a good psychiatrist You need one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, after the Romans sacked and destroyed most of Israel, the Jews cheerfully prayed alongside them "in harmony". What a stupid shmuck! The pagan minority was a conquering nation so of course they were tolerated. And there was always a large section of the Jewish population that chose to side with the Goyim even as they shed Jewish blood, in greek and roman times and even today. The arabs are a minority and they pray on the temple mount. That isn't because the Jews who care about torah want them there. It is because today, as in the roman times, there are self-hating jewswho side with the killers of Jews and the haters of torah.

The idea that there were no Christians before 313 C.E. is foolish. Suddenly, in 113 C.E., Poof! they appeared from out of nowhere??? Because Christianity wasn't the national religion nobody was Christian. By that reasoning, there are no Christians outside of the Vatican today. Instead of empty assertions you make up based on your beliefs, provide documentation for your assertions [1] of no Christians before 313 C.E., [2] of Emperor Constantine's order to burn other gospels and [3] of any "Lord J*esus Christ" between 33 C.E. and 135 C.E. when -- your earliest Church historian, Eusebius, documented (Ecclesiastical History IV.v.3) -- the Hellenist Romans, the first Christians, ousted the 15th Netzarim Paqid, named Yehudah ha-Tzadiq, displacing him with the first gentile bishop-pope, Markos! Christianity began in 135 C.E., no earlier. Only the prototypical Hellenist perversion of Torah-teachings by Paul the Apostate -- whom your Church historian Eusebius documents the Netzarim excised as an apostate (Ecclesiastical History III.xxvii.4) -- traces back to shortly before the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. Before that, Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT and all other Judaic literature of the period demonstrates, there could only have been a Torah-teaching Pharisee Ribi teaching in Pharisee synagogues; and many historians are increasingly corroborating this conclusion, from the late Oxford scholar James Parkes to Charlesworth. Only irrelevant Hellenist Roman -- misojudaic (antinomian) Christian -- redactions differ. Study history instead of deceiving Jews. Start with Parkes (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue). Paqid Yirmeyahu Paqid 16, The Netzarim Israeli Orthodox Jew (Teimani Baladi Dardai) Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

And he dares to call himself "Orthodox Jew' . Who recognised this FAKE guy as being Jewish ? No TRUE Orthodox Rabbinate did it

It is so told in commentary in the book of Acts that the name Christian was first used at Antioch..... but even at year 200 no canonical New Testament was known at Antioch, where some allege the first usage of the name "Christian". If it is true it is probably because of the Gnostics Christians (who were ancient...not to be confused with Christianity which later condemned them.

There is nothing new in this finding, except the interpretation given by Ynet is wrong. During the Roman era, Jews and Pagans surely lived as neighbors in the same towns. There were even some Gentile "Godfearers" who worshipped ONE GOD in Jewish synagogues, but did not practice the full rigors of Jewish law. The phenomenon of Jews and gentiles living together can be clearly seen throughout the Hellenistic world, from Sardis in Asia Minor to Caesaria in coastal Judaea to Dura Europos in Syria. However, in every case, the synagogue was a distinct and recognizable building separate from any nearby pagan temple.

When analyzing the behavior of the pagan Roman Empire, a common modern misconception is that their harsh treatments of various subject peoples stemmed from some sort of deep seated discriminatory bias, whether religious or ethnic. We tend to see things through the lens of today's conflicts based on national, racial, or religious hatreds. The ancient Romans were remarkably pragmatic and relatively free of those type of biases, and their persecutions and wars against other groups were politically motivated out of a desire to root out all opposition to their rule. (Indeed, there were Moorish, Arab, Syrian, and Illyrian emperors or Rome, and there was even a Jewish Chief of Staff of the Roman Army during the Jewish rebellion of 70 c.e.) Thus, the Roman effort to crush the Jewish rebellions actually began as an inervention to end communal violence between Jews and Hellenistic Pagans in the East. The Hellenistic Pagans were far more dominant and influential in the Eastern Mediterranean world, and Rome ended up having to intervene on their behalf because the risk of compromising their interests would have been far more costly to Rome than compromising the interests of Judaea, a tiny impoverished backwater province. However, Judaism was a recognized religion in the Roman Empire, and a large Jewish community was established in Rome itself. As for Rome's persecution of Christians, it had nothing to do with Christian theology. Rome perceived Christian proselytism as constituting a political threat to its rule, and the Romans suspected the Christians of political disloyalty to Rome, its emperor, and its secular insitutions.

You might call it a "special dispensation". The Jewish rebellion against Rome in 1966 was actually the culmination of a Civil War in the Hellenistic East between Jews and Hellenistic Pagans (primarily Hellenized Syrians). The far more numerous Hellenized Syrians needed Roman support in there communal conflicts with the Jews, so they started enlisting in the Roman Legions in large numbers. Jews ended up having to fight the same old pagan neighbors, but in Roman uniform, who claimed to be supporting the interests of Rome, while Jews in Judaea were oriented spiritually and politically toward Jerusalem. Ultimately, Rome had to send in the elite Roman legions, because the impoverished backwater province Judaea was too stiff in its resistance to manage using only local supporters and the local legions.

You say :".. that there were no Christians before 313 C.E. is foolish ". Paqid, I completely agree with you. In #6 is written :'Whereas before 313 AD, the followers of Lord Jesus Christ were harassed, beaten, persecuted, thrown to the lions to be eaten, hanged, killed by the consecutive Roman Emperors -- starting from 33 AD '. I think the 'followers of Lord Jesus Christ' are called Christians. What do you think ? I think you got messed-up there. And thus the rest of your first Paragraph is of NO importance -- being based on a wrong assumption, as shown above. Regarding your nr.2 : "of Emperor Constantine's order to burn other Gospels". Lord Jesus Christ had 12 disciples, known as the Twelve Apostles ; each one of them had their own Gospel. How come there are ONLY Four Gospels in the New Testament ? Regarding your nr.3 :"of any Lord J*esus Christ between 33 C.E. and 135 C.E.". When we speak of Lord Jesus Christ, we refer to THAT person who was born (in Israel) in 0 AD and crucified (by the Roman rulers of the Roman Empire) in 33 AD. You say :"Christianity began in 135 C.E., no earlier ". Paqid, I beg to DISAGREE with you. Christianity began with the start of the preaching of Lord Jesus Christ -- that means, it started in 30 AD. I think your reading at times is defective -- and that doesn't favor you. NEXT time, try to be humble.

You say :"There was no JC (i.e. Lord Jesus Christ) there was no crucification,..". Julius Caesar (born in 102 B.Chr., died in 44 B.Chr.) was the first Roman Emperor of the Roman Empire. SO, JMK, Julius Caesar did exist -- but Lord Jesus Christ (0 B.Chr. till 33 AD) did not exist, according to you. WHAT kind of logic is that ??? Are you aware of History ? Have you studied History ? IF not, why not ???

Yeah, sure, Jews said Birkat laMinim side by side with those very same Minim and Malshinim. The Amida was partially constructed not just to keep Jews from mingling with Roman occupiers, but also to PUSH FOREIGN INFLUENCES AWAY! As for Jews and 'Pagans' living in harmony- isn't this why we got exiled to Babylon in the first place?

It is quite possible that in Tzippori when the pagans were a minority among Jews that the the two people lived in harmony. But some historians of antisemitism have contended that in the antiquity times when the Jews were a minority among other people of the mediterranean lands, they suffered from hostility because since Abraham they did not any longer make human sacrifices to god as still did the pagans. This would have been the first form of religeous antisemitism even before the advent of christianity. May be this view is illustrated by the bible story of Jonas who was thrown over board by the pagan sailors for not praying like them to beg god for an end to a deadly storm.

I guess when Christians can longer burn people at the stake, or torture people to death, or burn their books and libraries, you might have nothing left except to call people crazy why not pagan or heathen or witch or jew,... there was no JC, there were no apostles, there was no peter, paul, mary joseph, john, luke, matthew, mark there was no birth, there were no perfidious jews involved in a non-event, just another pagan myth which makes it just like any pagan myth Zeus, Apollo, Mythra, Perseus etc, the NT is fiction, its writers were not Jews, its chronology is wrong, its geography wrong, its quotes the OT to prove prophesy wrong, unfortunately while a total fake the Jew hatred was and still is very real.

He was baptised when Lysanias was tetrach of Abilene which was until 36bce, his birth coincided with Herod who died 4bce, the tradit birth 1ce, his birth coincided with the census 6ce, His bapitsim coincided with Caiphas who was high priest until 15ce, and with Annas who was high priest beginning in 18ce, and coincided with Tiberias's reign 28/29ce and with Pilates rule 29-36ce, I am sure you have the answers.

You say :"Judaism was a recognized religion in the Roman Empire,..". If THAT was the case, then WHY did the Roman Emperor destroy the Second Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD ? IF Judaism was recognized by the Roman Emperor, then why destroy the MOST Holy place of the Jewish People (i.e. the Second Temple, in 70 AD) ??? You say :".. Romans suspected the Christians of political disloyalty to Rome, its emperor, and its secular insitutions ". Jake, the Romans had many, many temples build for the different (many, many) gods and (many, many) goddesses throughout their Empire. Roman religion was intertwined with the Roman Emperors -- till 313 AD. The Roman Empire was NOT secular -- at least not till 1453 AD ; the time when it (i.e. the Roman Empire) ceased to exist. Jake, I think you have to re-adjust your opinion regarding the Roman religion of before 313 AD.

You wrote: "Thus in 325 AD, Roman Catholicism became the State religion of the entire Roman Empire -- on the order of Emperor Constantine. Whereas before 313 AD, the followers of Lord J*esus Christ were..." Contrasting "before 313" C.E. with Roman Catholicism Christianity "in 325" C.E. suggests that you might regard "the followers of Lord J*esus Christ" "before 313" as something other than Christians. "Followers of Lord J*esus Christ," worshipping a Roman-fabricated Hellenized man-g*od deity, did not exist as an organized group until after 135 C.E. Your error was in "assuming" your man-g*od worshippers date back to 33 C.E. They don't! Not even the Hellenized apostate sect of followers of Paul the Apostate (see Eusebius, EH III.xxvii.4), the Ebionites, were idolatrous like your post-135 C.E. Christians. Your church historian inadvertently documented that there is no connection, other than a forcible usurpation of Jewish Netzarim Peqidim in 135 C.E. (documented by Eusebius EH IV.v.3) by the first gentile Hellenist Roman bishop (which became the basis for fabricating a Roman papacy -- documented by Eusebius EH IV.xxii.3), between the Roman Christians after 135 C.E. and, le-havdil, the Netzarim Torah Jews before 135 C.E. Christianity and the Church w born in 135 C.E.!!! I've documented these points, making no assumption (much less wrong). You, on the contrary, "assume"--contrary to eminent historians like the late Oxford scholar James Parkes--that the 4th-century Christians were the same as the followers of a Pharisee Ribi in the first century despite the overwhelming documentation unanimously accepted by historians of the world's leading universities. All of these historians in leading universities across the world agree that what you describe as "Lord J*esus Christ" is a polar antithesis of the historical Pharisee Ribi!!! Contrary to the historical Pharisee Ribi (who was born ca. B.C.E. 7, *not* 0, BTW), your Roman-redacted, Hellenized counterfeit was fabricated by Roman Hellenists only after the forcible usurpation of the Netzarim Jewish leadership in 135 C.E. YOUR "Lord J*esus Christ" is a Roman image and idol fabricated by Hellenist Romans in 135 C.E., *not* before!!! (Even the prototype upon which Hellenists based their fabrication, the Ebionite followers of Paul the Apostate, weren't idolaters.) So, *NO,* you do *NOT* refer to the historical Jew. You just "believe" you do. But that is a faulty *assumption* on your part!!! There was no "Lord J*esus Christ" to "preach" before 135 C.E. There was only a Pharisee Ribi who taught Torah. This is corroborated by virtually all of the most eminent historians in all of the leading universities in the world. You can "beg to disagree" all you want. While I document my points, you, by contrast, demonstrate that you have no documentation whatsoever for your assertion that Emperor Constantine ordered the "gospels" to be burned. (In fact, the Romans ordered the burning of Torahs, not "gospels.") There is no documentation, only your faulty "assumption" about 12 "gospels"--contradicted by the documentation in Eusebius that the Netzarim rejected all of the Greek "gospels" AND the NT, accepting only Torah as Scripture and *only* HEBREW Matityahu (not the Roman-redacted, Hellenized Greek perversion) as the only legitimate account of the life and teachings of Ribi Yehoshua (Eusebius EH III.xxvii.4-6). You can dismiss the documentation I present... but no intelligent person is going to do so. Have fun with your head in the sand. Do something about your ignorance other than continue to regurgitate it to people who know better. I repeat: Study history instead of deceiving Jews. Start with Parkes (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue). Paqid Yirmeyahu Paqid 16, The Netzarim Israeli Orthodox Jew (Teimani Baladi Dardai) Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il

First you say :".., there were no early christians,..". Then you say :".., christians were the barbarians,..". Dear JMK, IF there were no Christians ever, how come Christians turned out to be barbarians suddenly ??? Dear JMK, you are contradicting yourself.

You say :".. story of Jonas who was thrown over board by the pagan sailors for not praying like them ..". Although Jonas didn't pray like the pagan sailors, he was saved. Saved by WHO ? Saved by YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord. NO one is more powerful -, NO one is more mighty -, NO one is more intelligent -, NO one is more famous -, NO one is more opulent -, NO one is more beautiful -, NO one is more renounced then YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord.

Your first two paragraphs suggests that only Roman Catholics are Christians, which is of course NOT true. You say :".. the Church w(was) born in 135 C.E.". From 33 AD onwards the Gospel of Lord Jesus Christ were discussed in small gatherings in the homes of interested people -- people interested in the Gospel Of Lord Jesus Christ. In one sense, one could say that those (small) homes were the Churches of those beginning days. You say :"There was no "Lord J*esus Christ" to "preach" before 135 C.E.". I see that you don't like the title "Lord" being used for Mister Jesus Christ. Dear Paqid, Mister Jesus Christ is the representative of YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord -- sent to Earth (by YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord) to preach the glories of YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord. Because he is preaching the glories of YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord, and because he is the representative of YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord -- there is NO harm in referring to Mister Jesus Christ as Lord Jesus Christ. So, Lord Jesus Christ started to preach his Gospel in 30 AD -- and NOT in 135 AD, as you would like the world to believe. BTW I get the impression that you are quite envious of Lord Jesus Christ. HOW come ? NO sane person should be envious of Lord Jesus Christ. That is the WORST thing to do. ANYONE who becomes envious of Lord Jesus Christ will meet YAHWEH, the Supreme Lord, as his worst enemy. SO, there is NO benefit in envying Lord Jesus Christ !!!

When the history books record Rome being invaded by barbarians the barbarians were the christians and their ignorance that brought the Roman Empire and the rest of Europe into the dark ages of total illiteracy and primitivism, and there were no christian martyrs another christian lie.

My first 2 paragraphs suggest no such thing. I merely quoted you and explained the logical insinuations of your message. Thus, any meaning *you* attach to it derive from your message, not me pointing out its logical insinuations. There were a plethora of sects of Christians that each sect often distinguished "not Christians." I see, however, that you were entirely unaware of the alternative readings of your message. In addition to a host of other things, you're also unaware that Christians use "Lord" to imply divinity of their man-g*od. You have no documentation whatsoever, not the first shred, for your naked assertion of any "Gospel of Lord J*esus Christ" before 135 C.E. You're blissfully unaware of the well-documented historical fact that all of your "gospels" and NT date no earlier than the 4th century C.E. with the exception of a very few fragments dating back to the late second and third centuries C.E. -- NONE predating 135 C.E. (those predating 135 C.E., which contradicted their Hellenist redactions, are what the Romans burned!!!) and ALL extensively redacted by Hellenist Romans to conform to idolatrous Roman Hellenism... which they called "Christianity" and their resulting Hellenist Christian "version" their "Lord J*esus Christ"!!! There is nothing in your message but your personal assertions and opinions--which carry no weight whatsoever. You've provided no documentation at all, not the first. Your thinking, with no basis outside of your beliefs, is entertaining... but silly. You're a person who hasn't studied any serious history of the 1st-4th centuries C.E. trying to explain 2 books, neither of which you know how to read, to someone who knows and has demonstrated how to document 1st-4th centuries C.E. and can read both books. I can think of nothing more presumptuous, arrogant and silly than that. You're also profaning the Name, but that's no surprise. If you think I'm envious of your idol, which is an abomination, you've completely lost touch with reality. Paqid Yirmeyahu Paqid 16, The Netzarim Israeli Orthodox Jew (Teimani Baladi Dardai) Advancing Logic as Halakhic Authority Welcoming Jews & non-Jews www.netzarim.co.il