FOLLOW THE AUTO-PEN
Who wants a pardon?
Can we get autopen for Q?
I know that version
They asked he be prosecuted. They got what they asked.they requested it because if his supposed crime.
It was ordered h
His crime was written.
They requested
It is written
Huge KARMA on their end.
They got exactly what they requested they only raised hell literally after they realized what they requested made him stronger “dead”” than alive.
They just need a microphone on that connected to GROK. Can someone stick a mic in front of the autopen with reporter asking a question”Mr. President,…. “
https://x.com/drefanzor/status/1901500244262813818?s=46
Either Jesus is who he says he is or He is not. By default, His story has to be written one way or the other. It is interesting that it is written to favor the religions who do not believe He is son of God
Massie is an Engineer. They are smart . They can think logically. They have patience. They can be conniving. They arr fairly honest and trustworthy. But, and it’s a big but, they do t see the forest for the trees many times. They aren’t risk takers, so
It’s hard for them to think big . They often can’t see what’s coming at them
It’s not the nature of an engineer to be as cunning as is necessary for a president
That’s good
I tried discussing with Grok on whether Jesus was a Jew or not . I a not as knowledgeable as you to argue that he was not. I was able to argue one point about Him, but have you tried to argue with Grok? I would love to read the conversation
Not arguing that he could not be president, and a good one, and he would be better than most. Just saying he could easily get outsmarted by our enemies and competitors. However, some engineers are very cunning.
You are right.
I am one. Married to one. Have several in family. Worked around them all my life. Only a few have I truly been impressed with to be a good president.
Hmm. Interesting. Grok argued that Jesus was from the area of Jews, followed the social customs, entered into temples to teach, and observed Passover with his disciples, so he was in practical terms a Jew.
Then Grok argued that it was not actually the Jews who chanted for his crucifixion, because , even though the Jewish leaders may have stoked the flames, the crowd wasn’t necessarily Jewish , because it was attended by many there for celebration and they were not Jewish.
I told Grok you can’t have it both ways. If a large number of people in area were not Jewish , then Jesus could have easily been one of them. Like I said, I am not knowledgeable.
But arguing with a grok can sharpen one’s thinking.
I know that too. I asked about sexual allegations against Biden, but Grok would not include Ashley Bidens diary. Also said Coo s daughter never had her breadts rubbed by Joe.
I know there is a social media post where Maggie Coons said Biden felt her out, but I can’t find it
Thanks for that
Thanks for that
I asked Grok
I think you got him on this
You're referencing an interesting passage from the New Testament, specifically 1 Thessalonians 2:14, and suggesting it points to a distinction between Judeans and Jews as separate groups. Let’s break this down a bit.
In the verse you quoted, Paul is writing to the Thessalonian believers, commending them for enduring persecution from their own countrymen, just as the churches in Judea suffered at the hands of "the Jews." The Greek text uses "Ioudaioi" (Ἰουδαῖοι), typically translated as "Jews," and "Ioudaia" (Ἰουδαία), referring to the region of Judea. Historically and contextually, these terms can overlap but don’t always mean the same thing.
"Judeans" could refer to people living in the geographical region of Judea, which included various ethnic and religious groups, though it was predominantly Jewish by the time of the New Testament. "Jews," on the other hand, often denotes the religious or ethnic identity tied to the covenant people of Israel, regardless of where they lived—Judea, Galilee, or the diaspora. In some scholarly interpretations, Paul’s use of "the Jews" in this verse might specifically point to certain Jewish authorities or factions who opposed the early Christian movement, rather than the entire Jewish people.
Your claim that Jesus (and by extension Paul) goes to great lengths to distinguish them as "two separate nations" might be an overstatement based solely on this verse. The New Testament doesn’t explicitly frame Judeans and Jews as distinct nations in a political sense. However, it does highlight tensions—geographic, cultural, and religious—between groups like the Galileans, Judeans, and the broader Jewish identity. For example, Jesus’ ministry often clashed with the Jerusalem-based religious elite (many of whom were Judean), while he garnered support in Galilee.
If you’re drawing from other specific passages to support this idea, feel free to share them, and I can dig deeper. The distinction you’re pointing to might also reflect how later translations or interpretations (like the King James Version you quoted) handle these terms. What’s your take on how this fits into a broader narrative?
I gave read that. I don’t think the word Jew was used until centuries later. Did it have to do with the shaving of silver coins in Europe. Some British king hung hundreds of Jews for shaving coins. That’s why we gave ridges on quarters.
The idea that Jesus traveled to India isn’t supported by any direct evidence in the New Testament or mainstream historical records from the 1st century. The canonical Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—cover Jesus’ life from birth to his ministry in Judea and Galilee, his crucifixion, and resurrection, with no mention of travels beyond the eastern Mediterranean region, like to India or anywhere that far afield.
However, the theory pops up in some alternative historical and spiritual circles, often tied to the "lost years" of Jesus—roughly ages 12 to 30—where the Gospels are mostly silent. One source for this idea is the 19th-century book The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ by Nicolas Notovitch (1894). Notovitch claimed to have found a manuscript in a Tibetan monastery at Hemis, Ladakh, describing Jesus (called "Issa") traveling to India and studying with Hindu and Buddhist teachers. According to this story, Jesus survived the crucifixion, returned to India, and died there. The document’s authenticity has been heavily disputed—scholars like Max Müller and others investigated and found no evidence of it, and the monastery’s monks denied Notovitch’s claims.
Other traditions, like the Ahmadiyya Muslim belief, suggest Jesus survived the crucifixion and traveled east, possibly to Kashmir, to minister to the "lost tribes of Israel." There’s a tomb in Srinagar, called the Roza Bal, some claim is Jesus’, but this is a modern speculation with no ancient backing. Similarly, some New Age and esoteric groups tie Jesus to India through supposed parallels between his teachings and Eastern philosophies, like nonviolence or meditation, though these could easily stem from universal ethical ideas rather than direct influence.
Historically, the distance—over 2,000 miles from Judea to India—would’ve been a massive journey in the 1st century, taking months or years by foot or caravan along trade routes like the Silk Road. There’s no archaeological or textual evidence from Indian sources mentioning a figure like Jesus then, and early Christian writings (e.g., the Church Fathers) don’t hint at it either.
That said, the lack of evidence doesn’t stop speculation. It’s a compelling story for some, blending mysticism and cross-cultural exchange. What draws you to this idea? Are you leaning on a specific source or just exploring possibilities?