Talk:Hugh J. Schonfield

Untitled

"A Jew who termed himself a "Nazarene," meaning that he believed Jesus Christ was the Messiah, he believed that Jesus did not found Christianity, that St. Paul did, because he was mentally ill and thought he was himself the Messiah."

This is ambiguous: Who was mentally ill and thought he was himself the Messiah?

S.

suggested rewrite:

"A Jew who termed himself a "Nazarene," meaning that he believed Jesus Christ was the Messiah. He believed that Jesus did not found Christianity, *but* St. Paul did. *Schonfield thought St. Paul* was mentally ill and believed himself *to be* the Messiah."

Janosabel 17:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Dates of Schonfield's birth and death? RDH

If Schonfield studied officially at the University of Glasgow why is he not known to them as an Alumni? They have no record of him. I asked. Check it out please. I do know he was at a Glasgow Bible College, but it was not affiliated with the University. I suspect he did not actually have a Universtiy degree, great though his self-taught knowledge may have been.

He was a Doctor of Letters (DSLitt) one of the highest doctorates you can get. He went to St Paul's School (and I have verified this) You can find more info on www.schonfield.org

SE

Schonfield's exact academic qualifications

It is no good relying on St. Paul's to say if he went to Glasgow university or not. You have to ask the University concerned. I do know he went to Glasgow Bible College as a young man in about 1921. This is now known as the International Christian College and his signature and records of his stay can be seen in the archives if you look. I was told by a Glasgow university archivist that there was no record of him. But that was only by phone. Why don't you contact them yourself and check it out? Perhaps I am wrong. This message is for Wikipedia too. I don't know what a DS.Litt is. Do you mean D. Litt? Information in public encyclopedias should be absolutely accurate.

Recantation

I read somewhere (possibly in a book by Schonfield himself) that later in life, he recanted his following of Jesus.Toddsschneider (talk) 09:06, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Text moved from article, needs work and refs

START

Schonfield believed, furthermore, that Jesus was aware of and believed in himself as born to fulfill the role of the Jewish Messiah, and consciously made the effort to see that the prophecies were fulfilled in his daily life (and death); that Jesus did not intend to found a new religion, but intended instead to lead to the fulfillment of God's covenant with the Jewish people as documented in the Hebrew Bible; that Christianity, the religion, was the product of Jesus' followers, especially as proclaimed to "the Nations", i.e., non-Jewish people, at which point the connection to Jesus' original purpose was lost.

This disconnect from the original message occurred over a period of time, under great distress (wars, loss of nationhood, slavery, exile from Jerusalem and Palestine), and for a multitude of reasons. Among those who are mentioned as having distorted the message is Saul of Tarsus, also known as the Apostle Paul, who Schonfield depicts as mentally ill and as believing himself to be the Messiah. This is ironic given Schonfield is an Old Pauline, having been educated at a school bearing the Apostle's name. Schonfield believes that Jesus, himself, had nothing but good intentions in living his life out as predicted for the Messiah; Schonfield questions the result of the distortion at the hands of some of his followers, and at the hands of some who used this burgeoning new religion for less than honourable purposes.

Schonfield encourages believers in Jesus to take a critical view of what is told to them about him, and to endeavor to learn about the historical Jesus, how he fit into his times and land, and what was the purpose of his original message— faith in the Scriptures, living the exemplary life according to them, and for the purpose of alleviating misery, and making a difference to humanity.

END In ictu oculi (talk)

Delete tag removed, as allowed following edits

though the notability charge was justified in the form the article was in.In ictu oculi (talk) 00:17, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

As I was editing the article, I found you were editing at the same time, so I exited. Glad for what you have done to the article. Schonfield is certainly notable.Pete unseth (talk) 11:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)