Is Jesus actually the same being as God?
1 Tim. 3:16 ("God was manifest in the flesh")
As this is translated in the KJV it makes Paul say that Jesus is God "manifest in the flesh."
Although the KJV translates 1 Tim. 3:16 with "God" as above, nearly all other translations today use a word which refers, not to God, but to Jesus: "he" (NIV; RSV; NRSV; JB; NJB; REB; NAB [`70]; AT; GNB; CBW; and Beck's translation), "he who" (ASV; NASB; NEB; MLB; BBE; Phillips; and Moffatt), "who," or "which."
Even the equally old Douay version has "which was manifested in the flesh." All the very best modern NT texts by trinitarian scholars (including Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the text by the United Bible Societies) have the NT Greek word oV ("who") here instead of qeoV ("God"). Why do the very best trinitarian scholars support this NON-trinitarian translation of 1 Tim. 3:16?
Noted trinitarian Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:
"A capital example [of NT manuscript changes] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where `OS' (`who') was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (`God'). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts – though the majority even of Byzantine manuscripts still preserved the true reading." – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp.696-698, vol. 3.)
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com … h-kjv.html
Again you must search for God... and He will come to you.Well then, who is this "Who"?
great is the mystery of godliness: who was manifest in the flesh...?
It makes good sense to tell who the "who" is, instead of leaving it as "Who".
So therefore it is not wrong nor a mistranslation to put "God" there.
Or
"Which" was manifest in the flesh...
Then we would have to jump over to John1:1,14 to find out who the "which" is, ... the Word was God...and the Word was made flesh....
Oh, so God was manifest in the flesh!
Or
"He" was manifest in the flesh... He who" Jesus?, so to say Jesus was manifest in the flesh you are admitting that God is Jesus and was made flesh.
They key to this answer lies in Jesus self-discovery as a man in the physical. We must all understand what his great statement "I AM" means. This will sum it all up for you. It's great you asked this because so many others need to know even when they claim to already have the answers..I can guarantee they do not. Nobody does. That's the beauty of self discovery, and ONENESS. It's a journey and a progress and Jesus had to realize that he was GODLIKE or ONE with GOD. He had to know that God was within him. Just as he is in us ALL. Peace
**********************
He was saying that before Abraham was born, the I Am was already...there
I Am is the name God told Moses to tell the people He was.
See, Yahshua spoke only the words God told him, so everything that could ever happen or be felt etc..God already knew. That's what he was saying.
He was not saying he was before Abraham. He was not calling himself the I Am, and he was not using bad grammarSorry i do not agree. but nice try. Many would totally disagree I am sure. Support?
Did Jesus ever say the exact words "I am God?"
No, Jesus never said the exact three words, "I am God". But Jesus also never said the exact four words, "I am a prophet" or the exact four words "I am a man," but we know he was both a prophet and a man. It is not necessary for Jesus to say the exact phrase "I am a man" for us to know that he was a man. Likewise, it is not necessary for Jesus to utter the exact three words "I am God" in order for us to determine whether or not he is divine. Jesus may not have said the exact sentence "I am God" but he did claim the divine name for himself (Exo. 3:14 with John 8:58) and he also received worship (Matt. 2:2; 14:33; 28:9; John 9:35-38).
When Moses was up at the Mount speaking to God, Moses asked God what his name was. God said, "I AM WHO I AM"; and He said, 'Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel,' 'I AM has sent me to you,' (Exodus 3:14). In John 8:58 Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Right after this the Jews picked up stones to throw at him. Later, in John 10:30-33 Jesus claimed to be one with the Father and the Jews wanted to stone him again because they said to Jesus, "You, being a man, make yourself out to be God." Jesus had claimed the divine name for his own and the Jews wanted to kill him for it. Therefore, from Jesus' own mouth we see that he was claiming to be God.
The words "I am"
Now please understand that anyone can say the words "I am" and it does not mean that he is claiming to be God. Someone could say, "I am over here." That is not claiming the divine name. Likewise, someone could say, "I am hungry," or "I am sick." Neither example is claiming divinity, because the use of the term "I am" in context clearly shows us that is not what is occurring. But, in John 8:58 when Jesus said "before Abraham was born, I am," the Jews knew exactly what he was saying. Notice that he says before Abraham was born (using the past tense) and then he switches to the present tense when he says "I am." Jesus switches tenses of the verbs on purpose so that when he does so in the context of referencing Abraham, Jesus is clearly drawing the Jews' attention to the Old Testament Scriptures and then using a present tense form of the verb "to be" by saying "I AM". Someone who says "I am hungry" is not drawing attention to the Old Testament Scriptures for context.
Jesus was clearly causing the Jews to reflect upon the divine name "I am" that Jesus used for himself. We know that they understood this because as is said above, they said, "You, being a man, make yourself out to be God," (John 10:33).
* courtesy of carm.org (I won't attempt to summarize what they have already summarized so well)What? So you're saying that He was saying before Abraham was I AM existed? Then why didn't He say that, and not only "I am"? That's like someone saying I tell you the truth, before cell phones, telephones. It makes no grammatical or logical sense. Especially because John 8 is in the context of Jesus rebuking the hard hearted Pharisess for not believing in Him. This is the context. Then, in that context, He says I tell you the truth, before Abraham was I am or I exist, the Greek is "ego eimi," I am/exist.
That's exactly what was meant. You attempt to twist the meanings of things to seem correct or to prove yourself right, instead of being logical to what is being expressed. This reasoning is not so absurd as yours. It makes more sense. Lighten up. Either way he was referring to GOD BEING ALL KNOWING. meaning Before Abraham, God knew what would be. Even his own life & death.
*********************
I am happy you can see it. You have the eyes to see.
If God's name was Steven, it would have said
Before Abraham, was Steven.
God revealed it to us.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago
0He claimed only to be the Son of God.
13. When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? …..
15. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God
17. [b]And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven
Yahshua (Jesus to you) was simply saying that his works and the love he showed was a demonstration that he dwelled in the Father and the Father in him. God was manifested through Yahshua.
In other words the Father is glorified in (by)(through) the son
Concerning John 14-He went on to say in verse 10
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Which is what John said about God and us.
1 John 4:15
[/b]Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.[/b]
1John 4:16
And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him Yahshua showed God;’s love.
But this doesn't mean we are God the Father."If you see Me, Jesus, you see the Father." John 14
"Through Him, Jesus all things were made," John 1
"The Word, Jesus was the God," John 1
"Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," Titus 2
"Our God and Savior Jesus Christ," 2Peter 1
"The Christ, who is God over ALL," Romans 9
"THE Lord and THE God of me," John 20I hope this post will clarify some of your questions.
I have found these notes very interesting and I hope you will to.
From:
Legends of the Patriarchs and Prophets and other Old Testament…
By Sabine Baring-Gould
Esau and Jacob
Page 248
“The Cabalists say that the soul of Esau, whom the Arabs call Ais, passed into the body of Jesus Christ by metempsychosis, and that Jesus and Esau are one.”
Do you remember Deborah what Paul wrote about Esau?************************
When did Esau do this? I'd like to know.
I am open minded.
I'm embarrassed because I am a Kabbalist
I know that Moses and Elijah appeared to him and He transfigured.
And I believe in Reincarnation, as did most of the Hebrews in Bible days
I know three things Paul said about Esau
1. That Jacob hated him
2. That he was a fornicator
3. That Isaac blessed him.
BTW I wasn't asking questions for answers, but so he might think about it. But thank youAnyone who knows the beginning knows also the end. When magic is treated as real, darkness has no power over it.
To Whom Hath The Arm Of The Lord Been Revealed?
Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis. (St. Augustine)
What is the real name of God?
God is not God's name. However, the God of the Universe has a name.
You have Your own personal name. So does God.
"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name", see Revelation 3:12.
Hence we must ask ourselves: what is the real name of the Lord God?
Jesus Christ has the name that is above every name, see Philippians 2:9. "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved", see Acts 4:12.
Jesus Christ is our Lord and Father God.
The name Jesus signifies Savior, see Matthew 1:21.
Jesus is the Latin form of Esau.
Maybe, someone now understand why so many Jews, concerning Jesus Christ, shouted "Crucify him, crucify him!", see John 19:6, 2000 years ago, because they did not want this Jesus/Esau on the throne of David forever and forever, see Luke 1:33.
But this is nevertheless what should happen and has happened.
"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now", see John 16:12.
Everything gets its answer in its appointed time.*************************
So you believe Jesus (whose name was Yahshua because Yah is God's name) was God himself?*****************************
Savior In Latin Is
salvator
And Means
SERVATOR
SALVATOR
SALUTIFICATOR
CONSERVATOR
Yahshua Alternate spelling Yeshua
In Latin is
Iesu and is said Hey-sus
In Latin, it has no special meaning.
Jesus is the English Spelling
In Latin God is Deus
It also means Deity and Spirit, and does not always indicate the One Almighty GodIsaiah 63 (New King James Version)
The LORD in Judgment and Salvation
1 Who is this who comes from Edom, // Edom = Esau = Jesus
With dyed garments from Bozrah, // The capital city of Edom
// where Job was born and
// ruled as the second king of Edom
This One who is glorious in His apparel,
Traveling in the greatness of His strength?—
“ I who speak in righteousness, mighty to save.”
2 Why is Your apparel red,
And Your garments like one who treads in the winepress?
3 “ I have trodden the winepress alone,
And from the peoples no one was with Me.
For I have trodden them in My anger,
And trampled them in My fury;
Their blood is sprinkled upon My garments,
And I have stained all My robes.
4 For the day of vengeance is in My heart,
And the year of My redeemed has come.
5 I looked, but there was no one to help,
And I wondered
That there was no one to uphold;
Therefore My own arm brought salvation for Me;
And My own fury, it sustained Me.
6 I have trodden down the peoples in My anger,
Made them drunk in My fury,
And brought down their strength to the earth.”
Obadiah – (the original version)
“But upon Mount Sion shall be safety, and there shall be a Holy One.”
“And those who are saved again shall come up out of Mount Sion, that they may defend Mount Esau, and it shall be a kingdom to the Lord.”
Deborah, in the New Testament, the one whom you justly call Antichrist wrote:
Romans 9 (King James Version)
“ 1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. “
Hebrews 11 (King James Version)
“ 18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.
20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come. “
Hebrews 12 (King James Version)
“ 14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:
15 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled;
16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears. “
Deborah, can you tell us please why is Paul accusing God of hating Esau before this child was even born and did nothing evil?
(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Why Paul calls Esau “fornicator, or profane person” ?
16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
For what should God love Jacob and hate Esau, what have those people done to deserve hate or love?
Deborah, Kabbalah is Satanic. You've been horribly deceived, I'm afraid:
Question: "Which groups use the Kabbalah?"
"It is probably accurate to say that from the Renaissance on, virtually all occult philosophers and magicians of note had a working knowledge of some aspect of Kabbalah . . ." (Low, Colin. Hermetic Kabbalah. "Frequently Asked Questions"). Some groups that currently practice Qabalah are the Hermetics, the Gnostics, Knights Templar, the Neoplatists, the Pythagoreanists, the Rosicrucianists, Tantra, the English Order of the Golden Dawn, and the French magician Eliphas Levi. Some Qabalists practice ritual magic -- "names of power, the magic circle, ritual implements, consecration, evocation of spirits, etc." (Low, Colin. Hermetic Kabbalah. "Frequently Asked Questions." http://www.digital-brilliance.com/kab/)
The horrible most beastly Satanist Aleister Crowley was a member of the Golden Down and the magician Eliphas Levi designed the grotesque picture of Baphomet.
"To a greater or lesser extent, Kabbalism is the basis of nearly every tradition covered under the general heading of "occultism". Kabbalah is the basis for the rumored occult practices of the Freemasons, the Illuminati and the Knights Templar, the stylings of the O.T.O., the antichrist rituals of Jack Parsons, and the creation of mystical beings such as the Golem. Scientology is also roughly modeled on the Kabbalah, albeit filtered through a Battlestar Galactica sensibility.
When it started, the study of Kabbalah was secretive, especially among medieval Christians who feared the wrath of the Inquisition. After Aleister Crowley exposed the secrets of the Golden Dawn in the early 20th century, the cat was out of the bag, and Kabbalah began to be talked about among the religious intellectuals of the day. Crowley himself wrote extensively about the Kabbalah for the general public, as well as for his fellow students of esoterica."
"Kabbalism is a system of Jewish mysticism and magic and is the foundational element in modern witchcraft. Virtually all of the great witches and sorcerers of this century were Kabbalists." -William J. Schnoebelen, The Dark Side of Freemasonry
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20 … xposed.htm
You can't possibly be a Christian. No occult practices belong in Christianity.
Watch the below video. It's essential that you do and GET OUT of the practice of Kabbalah!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kafIO9w … sponse_rev*********************************************************************************
Great of you to say Kabbalah is satanic. People who are Satanic may use it. But it isn't
http://www.jewfaq.org/kabbalah.htm
I said Kabbalah because most people have heard of that.
I am a Jewish Mystic. The Kabbalah was based on it.
Jewish Mysticism has nothing to do with Magic or Satan. It is about miracles and God.
Many have taken the Kabbalah and turned it into what they want. Even the evil.
Jewish mysticism is not evil. It is to bring us close to God.
It is based on Scripture & Abraham
You can look up and copy many bad things about it. Someone is always going to have something negative to say about everything.
We all should be careful about attributing the devil to holy things.
Because you really don't know what you're talking about.
Mysticism:
Belief that union with the absolute (GOD), or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender.
http://www.jewfaq.org/kabbalah.htm
Mysticism in Judaism
Mysticism and mystical experiences have been a part of Judaism since the earliest days. The Torah contains many stories of mystical experiences, from visitations by angels to prophetic dreams and visions. The Talmud considers the existence of the soul and when it becomes attached to the body. Jewish tradition tells that the souls of all Jews were in existence at the time of the Giving of the Torah and were present at the time and agreed to the Covenant. There are many stories of places similar to Christian heaven and purgatory, of wandering souls and reincarnation. The Talmud contains vague hints of a mystical school of thought that was taught only to the most advanced students and was not committed to writing. There are several references in ancient sources to ma'aseh bereishit (the work of creation) and ma'aseh merkavah (the work of the chariot [of Ezekiel's vision]), the two primary subjects of mystical thought at the time.
Kabbalah: The Misunderstood Doctrine
Kabbalah is one of the most grossly misunderstood parts of Judaism. I have received several messages from non-Jews describing Kabbalah as "the dark side of Judaism," describing it as evil or black magic. On the other end of the spectrum, I receive many messages wanting to learn more about the trendy doctrine popularized by various Jewish and non-Jewish celebrities.
Read on something written by a Jew, who knows what they are talking about.
http://www.jewfaq.org/kabbalah.htm
At least I don't worship someone that's not God. Most on this forum do.
Here are some Bible Scripture that says God and Jesus are one and the same.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people claim to believe that Jesus was a “good prophet”, but they deny that Jesus is God. If that is you, I would like to encourage you to consider some of these Bible verses:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 1:23 - “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”
Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 43:10,11 - “You are My witnesses,” says the Lord, “And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no Savior.”
Revelation 1:17-18; Revelation 2:8 - (Jesus is the First and the Last)
Isaiah 44:6 - (God is the Redeemer)
2 Peter 1:1 (Jesus is the Redeemer) - “To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ”
Isaiah 44:24 - (God created the world by His self alone)
John 1:3; Colossians 1:16 - (Jesus made all things)
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... 1:14 - And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,
John 5:17,18 - “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.
John 5:23 - that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.
John 8:24 - “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM He, you will die in your sins.”
John 8:58 - Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”
John 14:6-7 - Jesus said to him, “I AM the way, the truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”
John 14:9-11 - Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?”
John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
Acts 4:12 - “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
Acts 20:28 - (God purchased us with His own blood)
Revelation 1:5,6; Revelation 5:8-9 - (Jesus' blood purchased us)
Philippians 2:5-7 - Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bond-servant, and coming in the likeness of men.
1 Timothy 3:16 - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.
Titus 2:13 - looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ
Hebrews 1:8,9 - But to the Son He (God) says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
2 John 1:7 - For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Revelation 1:8 - “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
Revelation 22:13 - “I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”... 22:16 - “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hebrews 2:17,18 - “Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted.”
Hebrews 4:15,16 - “For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.”
1 Peter 2:24 - “who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we having died to sins, might live for righteousness - by whose stripes you were healed.”
He went from sovereignty to shame and from deity to death? Why!? For you.
John 15:13 - “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends.”
Romans 5:8 - “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
FOR ZZRON
The meaning of ONE
In John 17 Yahshua prayed that his followers would be ONE as he and the Father is one. And that they would be one with Yahshua and God (us)
Married people are said to be one flesh. It doesn't mean they are the same person.
It does not mean God and Yahshua are the same person. Yahshua and God were in one accord.
Read the scripture below
John 17:11
And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, *** that they may be one, as we are.
John 17:21
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, * ** that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
We were also created in Gods image as Yahshua was.
Our spirit was also with God before he gave it to us.
Ecclesiastes 12:7
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.So what? That oneness is in the spirit, our human spirit to God's Holy Spirit, oneness/communion. Jesus made an example, a way, Who was God but lived as a man rightly related to the Father fully dependent on Holy Spirit, and so can we.
Just because it says the spirit returns to God who gave it, doesn't mean that it existed before, eternally. In Genesis 1-2 it says that God breathed into the man Adam THE breath/spirit of life and he became a living being/soul. God breathes it out/creates it and then it gives life. Amen.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
What religion is it that the people claim to prophecy,
cast out devils, and believe that the law is dead?
The CHRISTIANS
Matthew 7
22. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23. And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity
It says that the Gentiles will admit that their fathers inherited lies.
Jeremiah 16:19
O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit.Christ-ianity or Jesus Christ is not a religion, but the Covenant between God and man, a relationship with God.
Notice it says did not "we" as in they were riding someone else's ministry. And, the word "depart" does not mean go to hell necessarily, it means "back off", as in they will saved and in heaven but in the the city, not in the inner chambers of God and heaven.
Okay, but in context, Jeremiah 16 is about the restoration of Israel. And then after "verse 19" God says that He will show them His power so that they know His name, Jesus would be a fulfillment of this. And the New Covenant says that Christ-ians are part of the Israel of God, grafted in, not a Jew outwardly but of the heart inwardly.************************
God's covenant was with the Hebrews, not Christians
Christians are not his people.
Christian are a religion..which thinks it's the only one.
What other church says they prophecy, cast out devils, and think the law is done away with? ChristiansWe all are Hebrews in Christ (Romans 2, Romans 11).
God also said I will make a New Covenant, Jeremiah 31. My messenger will prepare the way before Me, Malachi 3. He was pierced for our sins, by His stripes we are healed, Isaiah 53, 1Peter 2.
Rather the Word of God says Jesus is the way to the Father, that there is no other name than of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, that you quote from earlier, that we can be saved by, Acts 4.
There's really only one church/ekklesia/called out ones. But, who cares? That's the point, it's people who do the "right" things with a wrong heart that are scolded here, not because they are wrong things, that's exactly the point. He says "many" will say this, not "all" will say this, not all who follow Me the Christ as Christ-ians will say this.Debra wrote
God's covenant was with the Hebrews, not Christians
? ? ?
ME
I agree completely
==================================================
Debra wrote
Christians are not his people.
?? ??
ME
I disagree ... We are all his people
================================================
Debra
Christian are a religion..which thinks it's the only one.
What other church says they prophecy, cast out devils, and think the law is done away with? Christians
= = = =
ME
Who knows the mind of God?
I believe that the Jews of bliblical times were following the prophesy of Daniel and his visions of the four beasts while waiting for the 14 king of the fourth kingdom.
They knew that the fourth kingdom had come into power, and they were waiting for the little horn which replaces three after the first ten.
They didn't recognize Jesus as the Messiah because when he came, they were under the rule of the 3rd or 4th Emperor and NOT the 14th. of the fourth Beast.
And he didn't come as a conquoring Military man as they were expecting.
Just my opinion. ???
"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?"
The sons of Sceva. Balaam and here's the kicker... works.. its not by works but by faith.
So this verse does not only apply to the christian but to the jew as well.
casting out devils is a false doctrine anyway. Prophecy was replaced by the word of knowledge as prophecy finished with the OT prophets. And people think they can earn their way to Gods favor by doing many good works - which is just not true. We can never earn our way.. Gods grace is to big for that.
To say that christ accepters are not Gods people completely ignores the grafting in of the gentiles. What was the outer court of the temple called, the court of the gentiles. How many times in the old testament are the gentiles said to be of Gods people - that he will call a people that are not of his people. Melchizedek was a gentile.
Thanks for your question.
Basically, God is three Persons but one God. We see multiple trinities in the physical universe. Space is length, width, and height. Time is past, present, and future. Matter is solid, liquid, and gas. An egg has a shell, a yoke, and a white. You can multiply 1 x 1 x 1 and it equals one. This is how God the Son Jesus Christ with His human form/nature can speak God the Father and be God Himself. Though it is a Mystery, it is also partly known. "The secret things are for the LORD but the revealed things are for us and our children forever." Deuteronomy 29:29.- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Yahshua said to leave the tares with the wheat. That means the word of God is the wheat and the only other person's words in the bible belong to Paul-the tares.
If you do not agree, tell me where the tares are. He said to leave the tares in.
Yahshua refers to people in one parable and refers to the word of God in another.
Matthew 13:25
But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way
Matthew 13:29
But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
When we want to know truth (as in this instance) we should ask what are the tares and where are they and then search for the answer.
We don't skip over it and leave it alone
Judas was called to betray Yahshua as the prophet said he would. Paul was called to fill the prophecy of Balaam in Numers.
To put a stumbling block in front of God's peopleReally? You're trying to use the parable of the wheat and the tares/weeds to say that Paul was false and a tare/weed? You can't be serious. I literally can't even comprehend this. I really don't understand how you could think this.
Jesus says the wheat are the sons of the kingdom/Christ-ians/His God Followers, and the tares are the sons of the evil one, nonChrist-ians, nonbelievers.
Read the whole chapter, read six verses later where Jesus Himself gives the interpretation of the parable:
36 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.”
37He answered, “The ONE WHO SOWS the good seed is the SON OF MAN.
38 The FIELD is the WORLD,
and the GOOD SEED is the SONS of the KINGDOM.
The WEEDS/TARES are the SONS of the EVIL ONE,
39 and the ENEMY who sowed them is the DEVIL.
The HARVEST is the END OF THE AGE,
and the REAPERS are ANGELS.
40 Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, 42 and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.
Truth proven, sufficient.
Is God weak so that He cannot preserve His Word? There are no tares in words, they are all true and useful for all purposes of righteousness, God is not a man that He should lie. The implanted word is to be received with meekness that is able to save/sozo/heal/etc. our souls (James 1).
Exactly, as shown above, Jesus interprets His own parable as He often does and shows what the tares are, the sons of the evil one. Then Jesus appears in Acts, written by Luke, and manifests to Paul and calls Him to be an apostle and an instrument (Acts 9). Jesus knows who is true and who is not, Jesus knows if someone is a tare or not, Jesus appeared to Paul and called him, Jesus appears to Paul later in Acts in a dream and tells him to keep preaching in the city because there are many of His people in the city and Paul stays there extendedly, all being written by Luke.
Judas chose what he chose, God does not tempt anyone (James 1-5). Judas could've repented, but he didn't, he chose to betray and then destroy himself. Paul chose what he chose, to respond to Jesus appearing to him and follow Jesus. The NC gives exhortation to not go in the way of Balaam, in 2Peter, Jude, and Revelation/Apocalypse.
Point proving, sufficient. Thank you though again. Genuinely bless you with grace and peace.***************************
I said, he refers in one place as the tares being a person and in another the word of God.
It's not the devil, it's his enemy Paul.
You think this is about debating and winning an argument...but this is about your very salvation.
If you don't care I surely don't.Okay. You said in Matthew 13, that you quoted, that the tare is a person. No where else are tares/weeds talked about. Jesus interprets His own parable. Amen.
It's not even the devil actually, once again, it's the sons of the evil one, as Jesus said. Jesus did not appear to Paul, call him, anoint him, etc. for him to be His enemy, he was His enemy before Acts 9 (that Luke wrote, not Paul), after that, His friend, servant, apostle, preacher, teacher, etc. Thank you.
How do you know what I think? Apart from asking me? I know, this isn't about winning anything, it's about what God Jesus Christ has already won, it's about proclaiming and living that. "It is finished." I have salvation in Jesus because I believe, as Jesus said "Whoever believes me in Me, has eternal life," John 3, John 6, Acts 26, etc. and "If you believe in your heart...you will be saved, for all who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved," Romans 10/Joel 2. Thank you though.
When you are willing and open and will use logic and truth and context, etc., then, let me know. Thank you again. Bless you and your sharp mind, your passion, your interest, your skill, your hard work, your studying, all of you, grace grace, grace and peace.Exactly!
Paul discreditors take much out of context, because they have to in order to support their fallacious claim that Paul is an enemy. Pauls letters are no good, luke is no good... we will only use half of matthew 13.
Its sad to see, really.**********
You're so righteous you show happiness when a hubber dies.
It's like Your statement of " I told you so"
You are evil to me. And a lot of people agree.
How dare you claim you are of God and take his name in vainWish i'd seen this earlier.
Happiness... is that how you interpreted that? I see how you distort much of the bible.
That doesn't even add up. When someone dies in an unrepentant state it is not happy news, in fact just the opposite.
I spoke truth and that is all. truth.
how you derive happiness from that is truly mystical.*****************
It is clearly speaking of the Devil, not cain.
John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.where did the devil murder someone in the beginning?
why does devil not have a capital D which would mean it is a proper name or title. Does the bible have a history of leaving capital letters out? Not in the translated english it does not.
You need to define the word beginning. The garden or that period of time before the flood.
So clearly since the devil did not murder anyone and obviously cain did murder someone IN the BEGINNING, I am sure your party hats and celebration can be put back in the drawer.
But hey, shall i debate scripture with you? I think not.brotheryochanan, you asked:
2." why does devil not have a capital D which would mean it is a proper name or title. ?"
- the reason for lack of capital D is that Christ was talking about the son of the Devil, not about Devil himself.
You were right that it could be Cain, as Cain was the son of Devil, however, descendants of Cain have been wiped out by the Noah's Flood.
Since Noah's Flood, there was not much violence on the earth, until two people have been born, two men, ancestors of two nations.
The firstborn was Esau and the attached one was named Jacob - ancestor of Jews.
Christ was teaching about this event in the Parable of Weeds.
To explore this story we have to go back to Genesis 25.
" 21And Isaac intreated the LORD for his wife, because she was barren: and the LORD was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
22And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the LORD.
23And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.
24And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb."
You ask:
1. "where did the devil murder someone in the beginning?"
- Christ was talking to the Jews about their beginning, about their ancestors: Judah and Jacob.
In the Book of Jubilee we read:
http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/jubilees/38.htm
[Chapter 38]
1.And after that Judah spake to Jacob, his father, and said unto him:
'Bend thy bow, father, and send forth thy arrows and cast down the adversary and slay the enemy; and mayst thou have the power, for we shall not slay thy brother, for he is such as thou, and he is like thee let us give him (this) honour.'
2.Then Jacob bent his bow and sent forth the arrow and struck Esau, his brother (on his right breast) and slew him.
3.And again he sent forth an arrow and struck 'Adoran the Aramaean, on the left breast, and drove him backward and slew him.”
For killing his brother Esau, God sent Jacob/Israel, with his whole family, into slavery in Egypt for 400 years.
Christianity believes that Jesus is who is God, and not the semi-divine, is full of people, but also fully God.
Judaism, Islam does not recognize that he is God, said he was just a prophet, just a special person.
Other non-believers, they think he is an ordinary person, but the creation of Christian
Akku Dell Inspiron 1520
http://www.pcakkus.com/dell-inspiron-1520.html
Akku Dell Inspiron 1720
http://www.pcakkus.com/dell-inspiron-1720.htmlOkay...? So what are you saying? It's recorded in nonChrist-ian history, by people who didn't even believe in Jesus being God, there are 65 events recorded, through which we see that He existed, did miracles, claimed to be God, His superior/flawless moral character, and that it was claimed by His followers that they had seen Him risen from the dead (historical writers: Josephus, Tacitius, Plynee the Younger, etc.).
Because?... You say so?... You have to give evidence to support your answer. I could say 2 + 2 = 4, not true, but it doesn't make it not true because I say so, and however I try to say so won't make it so.
Did Jesus ever exist?
by Ryan Turner
There are a number of radical skeptics today who claim that Jesus did not exist, or they seriously doubt his existence. However, there are a number of critical problems with doubting Jesus’ existence due to the early and abundant evidence that we have of Jesus’ life and deeds. In fact, there is almost unanimous consent among critical scholars today that Jesus existed.
Historical Textual Evidence for Jesus’ Existence
There are over 42 sources within 150 years after Jesus’ death which mention his existence and record many events of his life.1
9 Traditional New Testament Authors
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Author of Hebrews, James, Peter, and Jude.
20 Early Christian Writers Outside the New Testament
Clement of Rome, 2 Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Didache, Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, Fragments of Papias, Justin Martyr, Aristides, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Quadratus, Aristo of Pella, Melito of Sardis, Diognetus, Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, and Epistula Apostolorum.
4 Heretical Writings
Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Truth, Apocryphon of John, and Treatise on Resurrection.
9 Secular Sources
Josephus (Jewish historian), Tacitus (Roman historian), Pliny the Younger (Roman politician), Phlegon (freed slave who wrote histories), Lucian (Greek satirist), Celsus (Roman philosopher), Mara Bar Serapion (prisoner awaiting execution), Suetonius, and Thallus.
Historical Textual Evidence for Tiberius Caesar’s Existence
Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor who reigned during Jesus’ ministry, has 10 authors who mention his existence within 150 years of his life. These include: Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Seneca, Paterculus, Plutarch, Pliny the Elder, Strabo, Valerius Maximum, and Luke.2 If one removes Luke, since he is a New Testament source, there are 9 secular non-Christian sources. This means that there are just as many non-Christian sources for Jesus’ existence as there are for Tiberius Caesar’s! And, to compare, the total number of sources between Jesus and Tiberius Caesar are 42:10. Therefore, there are over four times as many sources for Jesus’ life and deeds than for Tiberius Caesar’s.
If one is going to doubt the existence of Jesus, one must also reject the existence of Tiberius Caesar.
Why is there not even more evidence for Jesus’ existence?
The fact is that few records survive for thousands of years. There are a number of ancient writings that have been lost, including 50% of the Roman historian Tacitus’ works, all of the writings of Thallus and Asclepiades of Mendes. In fact, Herod the Great’s secretary named Nicolas of Damascus wrote a Universal History of Roman history which comprised nearly 144 books and none of them have survived.3 So there is no reason to doubt the existence of Jesus of Nazareth.
1. Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2004, p. 233.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid., p. 232.
www.carm.org/jesus-existYou really need to stop posting this propaganda. Your whole entire post can be debunked by simply pointing out the fact that the author, Ryan Turner, never met to spoke with anyone by the name of 'jesus' Try again.
Oh, by the way, it’s a fact that there are no documents written during this supposedly ‘jesus’ lifetime which ever mentions him. Weird. Everything ever written about ‘jesus’ was written AFTER his supposed life. There is nothing unusual about this, but you would have to know how people lived in that era, something that you won’t find in the ‘bible’. Have a nice day.Did you just say that because ryan never met with jesus, that his discourse about jesus is bunk?
Thats easy to debunk lol.
There are reasons why nothing was written (that we can find, has endured or lasted the centuries) firstly, christians thought Christ was coming back soon so no need to write stuff down, although i am very sure the apostles kept notes. Secondly, Rome would not have cared to write stuff down about jesus, they did not write about appolonius or other mystical people. All they actually wrote were myths, so i am glad they never mention jesus - keeping him separate from their myths. Lastly, Rome burned, many books were burned after that and the vatican has stored much away to collect dust in their archives.
There is however a huge movement of people, at that time, whose lives depended and were threatened because of a non-existent person.
Gee,
have a nice dayIt's hard to explain Christianity without Christ or his resurrection. With the threat of death looming over them, the apostles would not have claimed they had seen Jesus alive unless they at least believed that had seen him. It makes no sense otherwise.
Non-biblical accounts of New Testament events and/or people
Following is a list of extra-biblical (outside of the Bible) references of biblical events, places, etc. The list is not exhaustive but is very representative of what is available.
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?, a Jewish historian) mentions John the Baptist and Herod - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 5, par. 2
"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions Jesus - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 3, par. 3.
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
There is debate among scholars as to the authenticity of this quote since it is so favorable to Jesus. For more information on this, please see Regarding the quotes from the historian Josephus about Jesus
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions James, the brother of Jesus - Antiquities, Book 20, ch. 9.
"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions Ananias the High Priest who was mentioned in Acts 23:2
Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem, he used all his endeavors and care that the country might be kept in peace, and this by destroying many of the Sicarii. But as for the high priest, Ananias (25) he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money
Acts 23:2, "And the high priest Ananias commanded those standing beside him to strike him [Paul] on the mouth."
Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) mentions "Christus" who is Jesus - Annals 15.44
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."
Ref. from http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.mb.txt
Thallus (Circa AD 52, eclipse of the sun) Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. His writings are only found as citations by others. Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221, mentioned Thallus' account of an eclipse of the sun.
"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun."
Is this a reference to the eclipse at the crucifixion? Luke 23:44-45, "And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 the sun being obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two."
The oddity is that Jesus' crucifixion occurred at the Passover which was a full moon. It is not possible for a solar eclipse to occur at a full moon. Note that Julius Africanus draws the conclusion that Thallus' mentioning of the eclipse was describing the one at Jesus' crucifixion. It may not have been.
Julius Africanus, Extant Writings, XVIII in the Ante Nicene Fathers, ed. by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973), vol. VI, p. 130. as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
Pliny the Younger mentioned Christ. Pliny was governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. Pliny wrote ten books. The tenth around AD 112.
"They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."
Pliny, Letters, transl. by William Melmoth, rev. by W.M.L. Hutchinson (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1935), vol. II, X:96 as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
The Talmud
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!"
Gal. 3:13, "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree."
Luke 22:1-2, "Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was approaching. 2 And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how they might put Him to death; for they were afraid of the people."
This quotation was taken from the reading in The Babylonian Talmud, transl. by I. Epstein (London: Soncino, 1935), vol. III, Sanhedrin 43a, p. 281 as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
Lucian (circa 120-after 180) mentions Jesus. Greek writer and rhetorician.
"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property."
Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 1113, in The Works of Lucian of Samosata, transl. by H.W. Fowler and F.G. Fowler, 4 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949), vol. 4, as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
Though Lucian opposed Christianity, he acknowledges Jesus, that Jesus was crucified, that Christians worship him, and that this was done by faith.
___________________
Sources
McDowell, Josh. Evidence that Demands a Verdict. San Bernardino, CA: Here's Life Publishers, Inc., 1979.
Habermas, Gary R. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company, 1996.
Encarta on the Web at http://encarta.msn.com.
http://carm.org/christianity/miscellane … dor-peopleAll of these anecdotes are cute but meaningless. Try posting some facts.
did you just say that historical documents are not facts? Is that like saying they don't exist or are conjured lies?
Some people just don't want to honestly examine that God might exist because the ramifications would demand to much from them and i think this is your stance.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
S&T
This is about the word of God..lies for doctrine planted by the enemy
And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:
Matthew 13
5. Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:
6. And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.
.
7And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:
8. But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.
9. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
10. And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11. He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
You try to convince yourself and others that you know a lot about the word of God, but I see through your facade and know you don't. I'd be embarrassedMatthew 13, Jesus Interprets His own Parable:
- the Seed is the Word of God, not lies/false doctrine
- the soils, rock, path, thorns, and good, are the different states of the heart that people choose
- nothing about false doctrine, only how people receive the Word of God
Oh, thank you so much. But I don't receive that condemnation and judgment. I receive grace and truth and love and goodness and righteousness. Why do you make such assertive claims of truth that cannot be explained logically, and at the same time condemn and judge as Jesus and the Word of God say not to and that there is none for God Jesus' people? Grace grace to you though, healing and restoration, peace not anger, forgiveness not bitterness, sweetness and spool and growth and glory.
I'm not trying to convince anyone, I haven't made any claims of knowing a lot, rather replied to people's words and demonstrated it, and I don't need or want to defend that, it is or it isn't, it is what it is. Thank you though. Grace and peace.
You should come visit me. I have researched what the Bible READS on this matter. The title is the question you are asking.
The argument of the Trinity. I once had to convince a very stoic believer of a non-Christian faith. The disbelief of the Trinity is the number one label for false religion. The non-belief of the three fold spirit of God. Father-Son and Holy Ghost.
I approached this as a study by reading the Bible from cover to cover and asked the question how could one not be the same. If you do the same you would realize that their is no possible way to separate them as individual entities and the evidence is overwhelming.- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
All four Gospels record Jesus as saying, "Blessed are the peacemakers; they will be called sons of God."
The word ‘son’ cannot be accepted literally because in the Bible, God apparently addresses many of his chosen servants as ‘son’ and ‘sons.’ The Hebrews believed God is One, and had neither wife nor children in any literal sense. Therefore, it is obvious the expression ‘son of God’ merely meant ‘Servant of God’; one who, because of faithful service, was close and dear to God as a son is to his father.
Christians who came from a Greek or Roman background, later misused this term. In their heritage, ‘son of God’ signified an incarnation of a god or someone born of a physical union between male and female gods. This is seen in Acts 14: 11-13, where we read that when Paul and Barnabas preached in a city of Turkey, pagans claimed they were gods incarnate. They called Barnabas the Roman god Zeus, and Paul the Roman god Hermes.
Furthermore, The New Testament Greek word translated as ‘son’ are ‘pias’ and ‘paida’ which mean ‘servant,’ or ‘son in the sense of servant.’ These are translated to ‘son’ in reference to Jesus and ‘servant’ in reference to all others in some translations of the Bible. So, consistent with other verses, Jesus was merely saying that he is God’s servant.
Problems with the term “Trinity”
To a Christian, God had to take human form to understand temptation and human suffering, but the concept is not based on any clear words of Jesus. (As though God, who knows everything would not already know) In contrast, God does not need to be tempted and suffer in order to be able to understand and forgive man’s sins, for He is the all knowing Creator of man. This is expressed in the verse:
‘And the Lord said: ‘I have surely seen the affliction of My people who are in Egypt, and I have heard their cry because of their taskmasters; for I know their pains.’ (Exodus 3:7)
God forgave sin before Jesus’ appearance, and He continues to forgive without any assistance. When a believer sins, he may come before God in sincere repentance to receive forgiveness. Indeed, the offer to humble oneself before God and be saved is made to all humankind.
‘And there is no God else beside Me; a just God and a Savior; there is none beside Me. Look to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is none else.’ (Isaiah 45:21-22, Jonah 3:5-10)
Biblically, people can receive forgiveness of sins through sincere repentance sought directly from God. This is true always and in all places. There has never been a need for the so-called intercessory role Jesus plays in attaining atonement. The facts speak for themselves. There is no truth to the Christian belief that Jesus died for our sins and salvation is only through Jesus. What about the salvation of people before Jesus? Jesus’ death brings neither atonement from sin, nor is it in any way a fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
Christians claim that in the birth of Jesus, there occurred the miracle of the incarnation of God in the form of a human being. To say that God truly became a human being invites several questions. I
The everlasting, one God, in whole or in part, does not die, disintegrate, or decompose: ‘For I the Lord do not change.’ (Malachi 3:6) even into a human.
Bible says that God is not man
‘God is not a man’ (Numbers 23:19)
‘For I am God, and not man’ (Hosea 11:9)
Jesus is called a man many times in the Bible
‘a man who has told you the truth’ (John 8:40)
Yahshua
‘Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know.’ (Acts 2:22)
‘He will judge the world in righteousness through a man whom He has appointed’ (Acts 17:31)
‘the man Christ Jesus’ (Tim. 2:5)
The Bible says that God is not a son of man
‘God is not a man nor a son of man’ (Numbers 23:19)
The Bible often calls Jesus ‘a son of man’ or ‘the son of man.’
‘so will the son of man be’ (Matthew 12:40)
‘For the son of man is going to come’ (Matthew 16:27)
‘until they see the son of man coming in His kingdom.’ (Matthew 28)
‘But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority’ (Mark 2:10)
‘because he is the son of man’ (John 5:27)
In the Hebrew scriptures, the ‘son of man’ is also used many times speaking of people (Job 25:6; Psalm 80:17; 144:3; Ezekiel 2:1; 2:3; 2:6-8; 3:1-3).
Since God would not contradict Himself by first saying He is not the son of a man, then becoming a human being who was called ‘the son of man’, he would not have done so. Remember God is not the author of confusion. Also, human beings, including Jesus, are called ‘son of man’ specifically to distinguish them from God, who is not a ‘son of man’ according to the Bible.
The Bible says that Jesus denied he is God
Jesus spoke to a man who had called him ‘good,’ asking him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.’ (Luke 18:19)
And he said to him, ‘Why are you asking me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.’ (Matthew 19:17)
Jesus did not teach people that he was God
If Jesus had been telling people that he was God, he would have complimented the man. Instead, Jesus rebuked him, denying he was good that is, Jesus denied he was God.
The Bible says that God is greater than Jesus
‘My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28)
‘My father is greater than all.’ (John 10:29)
Jesus can not be God if God is greater than he. The Christian belief that the Father and son are equal is in direct contrast to the clear words from Jesus.
Jesus never instructed his disciples to worship him
‘When you pray, say Our Father which art in heaven.’ (Luke 11:2)
‘In that day, you shall ask me nothing. Whatsoever you ask of the Father in my name.’ (John 16:23)
‘The hour cometh and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him.’ (John 4:23)
If Jesus was God, he would have sought worship for himself
Since he didn’t, instead he sought worship for God in the heavens, therefore, he was not God.
Jesus worshipped the only true God
‘that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.’ (John 17:3)
‘he continued all night in prayer to God.’ (Luke 6:12)
‘Just as the son of man did not come to be served, but to serve’ (Matthew 20:28)
How did Jesus pray to God?
‘he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, ‘My Father’ (Matthew 26:39)
‘During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission.’ (Hebrews 5:7)
Who was Jesus praying to when he fell on his face?
Was Jesus crying in tears to himself pleading to be saved from death? No man, sane or insane, prays to himself! Surely, the answer must be a resounding ‘No.’ Jesus was praying to ‘the only true God.’ Jesus was the servant of the One Who sent him. Can there be a clearer proof that Jesus was not God?
The Quran confirms that Jesus called for the worship of the Only True God:
“It is Allah Who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a Way that is straight.” (Quran 3:51)
Disciples did not believe Jesus was God
The Acts of the Apostles in the Bible details the activity of the disciples over a period of thirty years after Jesus was raised to heaven. Throughout this period, they never referred to Jesus as God. For instance, Peter stood up with the eleven disciples and addressed a crowd saying:
‘Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.’ (Acts 2:22)
For Peter, Jesus was a servant of God (confirmed in Matthew 12:18)
‘The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus.’ (Acts 3:13)
‘God raised up his servant’ (Acts 3:26)
When faced by opposition from the authorities, Peter said
‘We must obey God instead of men! The God of our fathers raised Jesus’ (Acts 5:29-30)
The disciples prayed to God just as they were commanded by Jesus in Luke 11:2, and considered Jesus to be God’s servant.
‘they raised their voices together in prayer to God. ‘Sovereign Lord,’ they said, ‘you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them.’ (Acts 4:24)
‘your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed.’ (Acts 4:27)
‘of Your holy servant Jesus.’ (Acts 4:30)
‘I am indeed a servant of God.’ (Quran 19:30)
The Bible says that Jesus was God’s servant
‘Behold, My servant, whom I have chosen, in whom My soul is well pleased.’ (Matt 12:18) Since Jesus is God’s servant, Jesus cannot be God.
The Bible says that Jesus could not do anything by himself
‘The son can do nothing by himself; he can only do what he sees his Father doing.’ (John 5:19)
‘I can of mine own self do nothing.’ (John 5:30)
The Bible says that Jesus did not consider himself equal with God
and that God performed miracles through Jesus & Jesus was limited in what he could do:
‘But when the crowds saw this, they were awestruck, and glorified God, who had given such authority to men.’ (Matt. 9:8)
‘a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst.’ (Acts 2:22)
‘he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him.’ (Acts 10:38)
If Christ were God, the Bible would simply say that Jesus did the miracles himself without making reference to God. The fact that it was God supplying the power for the miracles shows that God is greater than Jesus.
Also, Jesus was limited in performing miracles
One time when Jesus tried to heal a blind man, the man was not healed after the first attempt, and Jesus had to try a second time (Mark 8:22-26).
Once a woman was healed of her incurable bleeding. The woman came up behind him and touched his cloak, and she was immediately healed. But, Jesus had no idea who touched him:
‘At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, ‘Who touched my clothes?’ (Mark 5:30)
‘He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.’ (Mark 6:5)
Quite obviously, someone with such limitations cannot be God. The power of miracles was not within Jesus.
The Bible says that at times of weakness angels strengthened Jesus
God , however, does not need to be strengthened. Human need to be strengthened; God does not because God is All-Powerful. If Jesus had to be strengthened, he must not be God.
‘An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him - in the garden of Gethsemane’ (Luke 22:43)
‘Then the devil left him; and behold, angels came and began to minister to Him’ (Mark. 1:13)
‘And he was in the wilderness forty days being tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts, and the angels were ministering to him.’ (Mark 1:13)
The Bible says that Jesus wanted God’s will to be done
‘not my will but Yours be done.’ (Luke 22:42)
‘I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30)
‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38)
Are some members of the coequal Trinity subservient, and less than equal, to other members? Although they have different wills (‘I do not seek my own will’), do they obey without question the others’ commands (‘the will of Him who sent me’)? Jesus admits to subordinating his own distinct will, yet according to the Trinitarian doctrine they should all have the same will. Should one of the triune partners have to forgo his own will in favor of the will of another member of the Trinity? Should not they all have the exact same will?
The Bible says Jesus regarded himself and God as two
‘I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father.’ (John 8:17-18:)
‘Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me.’ (John 14:1)
If Jesus were God, He would have not had regarded God’s testimony as separate from his own.
The Bible says that Jesus is subordinate to God
‘Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.’ (1 Corinthians 11:3)
‘When he has done this, then the son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.’ (1 Corinthians 15:28)
Bible says that Jesus grew in wisdom & learning
But, God is All Wise & does not need to learn: Jesus grew in wisdom, but God is all wise ‘Great is our Lord and abundant in strength; His understanding is infinite.’ (Psalms 147:5)
‘And Jesus increased in wisdom.’ (Luke 2:52)
God does not need to learn, but Jesus learned: ‘Although he was a son, he learned obedience’ (Heb. 5:8)
Jesus had limited knowledge, but God’s knowledge is infinite. Since Jesus did not know, he was not all-knowing, and therefore, he cannot be the God whose knowledge is all-encompassing.
‘No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the son, but only the Father.’ (Mark 13:32)
Bible says that Jesus was tempted, but God cannot be tempted
’tempted in every way - just as we are’ (Heb. 4:15)
‘for God cannot be tempted by evil’ (James 1:13)
Since God cannot be tempted, but Jesus was, therefore, Jesus was not God.
Bible says that Jesus’ teachings were from God, not from himself
‘So Jesus answered them and said, ‘My teaching is not mine, but His who sent me.’ (John 7:16)
Jesus could not have said this if he were God because the doctrine would have been his.
Bible says that Jesus died, but God cannot die
The Bible teaches that Jesus died. God cannot die. Romans 1:23 and other verses say that God is immortal. Immortal means, ‘not subject to death.’ This term applies only to God.
Bible says that Jesus lived because of God
‘I live because of the Father.’ (John 6:57)
Jesus cannot be God because he depended on God for his own existence.
Bible says that Jesus’ powers were given to him
‘All power is given unto me.’ (Matt 28:18)
God is all-powerful, no one gives God His powers, otherwise, He would not be God because He would be weak. Therefore, Jesus could not be God.
Bible says that Jesus was taught & commanded by God
‘As my Father hath taught me, I speak these things,’ (John 8:28)
‘The Father, who sent me, he gave me a commandment.’ (John 12:49)
‘I have kept my Father’s commandments.’ (John 15:10)
No one can teach God, otherwise, God cannot be All-Knowing and would owe His teacher. Since Jesus was taught and commanded by God, Jesus cannot be God himself. The teacher and the student, the commander, and the commanded are not one.
Bible says that God made Jesus ‘Lord’!
‘God has made this Jesus both Lord and Christ.’ (Acts 2:36)
‘Lord’ is used in many ways in the Bible, and others beside God and Jesus are called ‘Lord.’ For example:
1) property owners (Matt. 20:8)
2) heads of households (Mark 13:35)
3) slave owners (Matt. 10:24)
4) husbands (1 Pet. 3:6)
5) a son called his father Lord (Matt. 21:30)
6) the Roman Emperor was called Lord (Acts 25:26)
7) Roman authorities were called Lord (Matt. 27:63)
‘Lord’ is not the same as ‘God.’ ‘Lord’ (the Greek word is kurios) is a masculine title of respect and nobility used frequently in the Bible. If Jesus were God, then for the Bible to say he was ‘made’ Lord would make no sense.
Bible says that Jesus was lower than angels
‘But we do see him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus.’ (Hebrews 2:9)
God, the Creator of angels, cannot be lower than His own creation, but Jesus was. Therefore, Jesus was not God.
Bible says that Jesus called the Father ‘my God’
‘My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?’ (Matt. 27:46)
‘I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God, and your God.’ (John 20:17)
‘the temple of my God the name of my God the city of my God comes down out of heaven from my God.’ (Rev. 3:12)
Jesus did not think of himself as God, instead Jesus’ God is the same as ours.
Bible says that God cannot be seen
But, Jesus was seen by others ‘no man has seen God at any time.’ (John 1:18)
Bible says twice that Jesus was accused of being God
But, he denied it: According to the Bible, on only two instances the Jews opposed Jesus on the basis that he pretended to be God or equal with God. Had Jesus, may the mercy and blessings of God be upon him, claimed to be God, he is likely to have been opposed on this basis more frequently.
Because in these two instances, when charged, in the one case, with making himself God, and in the other, with making himself equal with God, he denied the charges. In reply to the charge of being an equal with God, he says immediately:
‘The son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do’; and directly after ‘I can of mine own self do nothing.’ (John 5:19, 30)
In answer to the charge of making himself God, he appeals to the Jews in substance; thus: Your own Scriptures call Moses a god, and your magistrate’s gods; I am surely not inferior to them, yet I did not call myself God, but only the ‘son’ of God (John 10:34-36).
This is unlikely to have been Jesus’ actual response. Hastings in ‘The Dictionary of the Bible’ says, ‘Whether Jesus used it of himself is doubtful.’ Grolier’s encyclopedia, under the heading ‘Jesus Christ,’ says, ‘it is uncertain whether the Father/Son language (Mark 18:32; Matt. 11:25-27 par.; John passim) goes back to Jesus himself.’ A University of Richmond professor, Dr. Robert Alley, after considerable research into newly found ancient documents concludes that:
‘The (Biblical) passages where Jesus talks about the Son of God are later additions. What the church said about him. Such a claim of deity for himself would not have been consistent with his entire lifestyle as we can reconstruct. For the first three decades after Jesus’ death Christianity continued as a sect within Judaism. The first three decades of the existence of the church were within the synagogue. That would have been beyond belief if they (the followers) had boldly proclaimed the deity of Jesus.’
Assuming Jesus did say that he was ‘son’ of God. What did it mean? We first need to know the language of his people, the language of the Jews to whom he was speaking.
The Bible says God had many ‘sons’
First, most people think there are no other verses that contradict or give equal divine sonship to other persons in the Old or New Testament.
For Jesus to be called son of God, does not make him a true son of God, other wise Adam, Jacob, Ephraim and many more should also be considered as been sons of God as such they should be worshiped too according to such method.
Adam: ‘Adam, which was the son of God.’ (Luke 3:38)
Jacob is God’s son and firstborn: ‘Israel is my son, even my firstborn.’ (Exodus 4:22)
Solomon: ‘I will be his father, and he shall be my son.’ (2 Samuel 7:13-14)
Ephraim: ‘for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.’ (Jeremiah 31:9)
‘Ye are the children of the Lord your God’ (Deuteronomy 14:1)"The Son of God (Jesus Christ) became the Son of Man, so that the sons of men, could become the Sons of God." - Kris Vallotton
All four Gospels record Jesus as saying, "Blessed are the peacemakers; they will be called sons of God."
Just matthew lists the beatitudes and peacemakers is only listed once.
Interesting, i have children of God, but the interlinear says sons. Children comes up often using G5207. I suppose this means children and son(s) are interchangeable. The Hebrew Ben is more specific, but, in either instance; lets use sons. Sons as we know carry the weight, they are prominent in Jewish society, they inherit, have power, are supposed to be leaders etc. It is also indicative of a strong relationship from the father to the son. For the hebrews or the jews to think of God as their father, well, they would rather think of abraham as their father. This was a new concept to the Jewish people, although it rightly fit jesus who was conceived of God through Mary, Jesus was indeed, Gods son, but, did Jesus exclude others from what he had? No. If we are all Gods children it is not a far stretch of imagination to accept we can also be Gods sons with all the applications that go along with that.
The word ‘son’ cannot be accepted literally because in the Bible, God apparently addresses many of his chosen servants as ‘son’ and ‘sons.’ The Hebrews believed God is One, and had neither wife nor children in any literal sense. Therefore, it is obvious the expression ‘son of God’ merely meant ‘Servant of God’; one who, because of faithful service, was close and dear to God as a son is to his father.
Servant is a different word than son. G1401 for servant and G5207 for son or children. So no they cannot be the same word. H5650 for servant and H1121 Ben for son. So no they cannot be the same word. It seems that both the greek and hebrew are exact on their wording of servant and son. I cannot find anywhere in the OT where God calls his servant a son and I spent 40 minutes with a double search on the word search for servant and son - I got a lot of hits but nothing what we are looking for.
So i might suspect and say that this is what is meant when he said "your thoughts".
Christians who came from a Greek or Roman background, later misused this term. In their heritage, ‘son of God’ signified an incarnation of a god or someone born of a physical union between male and female gods. This is seen in Acts 14: 11-13, where we read that when Paul and Barnabas preached in a city of Turkey, pagans claimed they were gods incarnate. They called Barnabas the Roman god Zeus, and Paul the Roman god Hermes.
It is not christians who called Paul and Barnabas roman gods but the pagans. And Paul and Barnabus straightly reproved them. Now to the roman pagans their gods, zeus and such were very much visitors in human flesh and they had human intercourse they were so much such fleshly gods. But your thoughts about this are that the christians had the idea of incarnation wrong. Seeing as the pagans are the ones who had the idea about paul and barnabus how do you surmise that the christians had this wrong? I think you have read to much into this or misread it.
Furthermore, The New Testament Greek word translated as ‘son’ are ‘pias’ and ‘paida’ which mean ‘servant,’ or ‘son in the sense of servant.’
This is completely wrong as i stated previously. It's kind of a jaw dropper.
These are translated to ‘son’ in reference to Jesus and ‘servant’ in reference to all others in some translations of the Bible. So, consistent with other verses, Jesus was merely saying that he is God’s servant.
I am just going to ignore that statement for brevity sake
To a Christian, God had to take human form to understand temptation and human suffering,
No. He did not have to, He chose to. Nobody asked God to do this but in order to have a resurrection there had to be a body. In order for Jesus sacrifice to adhere to the OT sacrificial laws, without spot, wrinkle, blemish or any such thing - perfect - sacrifice was needed and hence a body was needed. So to say what you said is again your thoughts.
but the concept is not based on any clear words of Jesus. (As though God, who knows everything would not already know) In contrast, God does not need to be tempted and suffer in order to be able to understand and forgive man’s sins,
again, this was not done so God could understand and forgive. It was done to fulfill scripture and other reasons. Again these are your thoughts.
God forgave sin before Jesus’ appearance, and He continues to forgive without any assistance. When a believer sins, he may come before God in sincere repentance to receive forgiveness. Indeed, the offer to humble oneself before God and be saved is made to all humankind.
In the OT a person could not just come before God and receive forgiveness this is precisely what the sacrificial system was all about. Only through the blood of animals could they receive temporary forgiveness for their sins. Temporary because they were going to sacrifice again in due time. Another jaw dropper
‘And there is no God else beside Me; a just God and a Savior; there is none beside Me. Look to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is none else.’ (Isaiah 45:21-22, Jonah 3:5-10)
Biblically, people can receive forgiveness of sins through sincere repentance sought directly from God. This is true always and in all places. There has never been a need for the so-called intercessory role Jesus plays in attaining atonement.
There has always been this necessity.
Psalms 40:7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,
Hebrews 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
The facts speak for themselves.
your thoughts speak for themselves. These are not facts.
There is no truth to the Christian belief that Jesus died for our sins and salvation is only through Jesus.
So why did jesus exist then? If not to end the law? if not for sin? if not to teach people truth? Why was jesus ministry so much more powerful than any other past prophet? Why was jesus bringing all this new stuff to the playing field? Why was he able to foretell his own death and resurrection? There are lots of facts about jesus role in forgiveness of sin and the new covenant if one believes the books of the bible.
What about the salvation of people before Jesus?
"Romans 3:30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith."
It makes no difference if someone is circumcized or not if they do not keep Gods ways... so what makes a person justified then...
Psalms 31:23 "O love the LORD, all ye his saints: for the LORD preserves the faithful, and plentifully rewards the proud doer."
Habakkuk 2:4 "Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith."
They are judged by their faith. They were under a different covenant. The covenant of law.
Jesus’ death brings neither atonement from sin, nor is it in any way a fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
your thoughts
Christians claim that in the birth of Jesus, there occurred the miracle of the incarnation of God in the form of a human being. To say that God truly became a human being invites several questions.
I. The everlasting, one God, in whole or in part, does not die, disintegrate, or decompose: ‘For I the Lord do not change.’ (Malachi 3:6) even into a human.
Malachi 3 is interesting lets look at some other verses first since you mentioned jesus not fulfilling bible prophecy:
Malachi 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
Malachi 3:2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appears? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:
Malachi 3:3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness.
I think that's self explanatory
in context here is verse 6:
Malachi 3:5 And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.
Malachi 3:6 FOR I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Properly understood the lord changes not in respect to the prior verse and the one after it - judgment. It in no way does not mean that God would never take a human form... do we have other examples of God visiting humans in the bible... yes we do. The three angels that appeared to abraham, Melchizedek, in the fire with daniel... How can anyone say that God would never come to earth in human flesh is arrogance.
Bible says that God is not man
‘God is not a man’ (Numbers 23:19)
lets look at the whole verse:
"God is not a man, that he should lie". Fair enough and in this example, in this period of time and to acknowledge this verse.. God is not a man. I agree. But this does not imply that he would never be a man. Again your thoughts.
‘For I am God, and not man’ (Hosea 11:9)
Drawing a comparison about the vengeful qualities man has. 'return and destroy ephraim' speaks of revenge. But in this analogy God reminds us that he is above such human traits. Again this does not say that God will never be a man, it does state that at this time he is not (like) man.
Jesus is called a man many times in the Bible
‘a man who has told you the truth’ (John 8:40)
john 8:42 "If God were your father, you would love me: for I PROCEEDED forth and CAME FROM GOD". It is impossible to separate Jesus from being a man because he was born of flesh and in each and every case of being born from flesh we get flesh.. but its whats on the inside that counts. In the OT the prophets had the spirit of God temporarily, they said their message and then it was life as normal apart from the spirit again. But Jesus, everything about him is huge, enormous - so its just not the flesh and man but the spirit inside the man.
The Bible often calls Jesus ‘a son of man’ or ‘the son of man.’
‘so will the son of man be’ (Matthew 12:40)
‘until they see the son of man coming in His kingdom.’ (Matthew 28)
‘But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority’ (Mark 2:10)
If you want to talk about son of man:
Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
Daniel 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that ALL people, nations, and languages, should SERVE HIM: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
YASHUA indeed. Son of man was a favorite expression of Jesus', referring to these scriptures.
Since God would not contradict Himself by first saying He is not the son of a man, then becoming a human being who was called ‘the son of man’, he would not have done so.
Its not a contradiction. The body was needed to be resurrected and that should be enough example to persuade that possibly God became a man. John the baptist said:
John 1:29 "The next day John sees Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world."
If God isn't in Jesus how do we get an acceptable sacrificial lamb? Every OT saint sinned but it was so very very important that Jesus did not sin.
The Bible says that Jesus denied he is God
Jesus spoke to a man who had called him ‘good,’ asking him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.’ (Luke 18:19)(Matthew 19:17 - is the same story)
This is deep. We need to look at the whole chapter, not just one verse or this short conversation. First we have insistence and need in the woman wearying the judge, then the pharisee and publican - lessons in humility; rich contrasted to poor. Then the children, the unimportant of a young age left aside until they are older. The the ruler and his question. Obviously the ruler tries to flatter jesus. Back to luke 18:19.. and he spake this unto people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous. We see how God notices the attitude of this ruler and contradicts him. Jesus does not do this to deprecate himself or show that he is not God. He does this because the ruler needs to know that human credentials mixed with flattery will not suffice. He needs to know God; and Jesus points the way. Jesus cannot say, oh thank you very much, jesus is humble and he stays true to form by representing that God (outside of himself) is only good. The ruler says all those commandments have i kept from my youth up.. a rather impossible thing to do since his money means so much to him.
Jesus did not teach people that he was God
If Jesus had been telling people that he was God, he would have complimented the man.
If jesus had said he was God we would have have a 1/2 yr ministry instead of 3.5 yrs and you should know this.. so why make up stories?
Instead, Jesus rebuked him, denying he was good that is, Jesus denied he was God.
Your thoughts
The Bible says that God is greater than Jesus
‘My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28)
‘My father is greater than all.’ (John 10:29)
ever look up the definition of greater? Its not what you think
Jesus can not be God if God is greater than he. The Christian belief that the Father and son are equal is in direct contrast to the clear words from Jesus.
but not daniel 7 or John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
Jesus never instructed his disciples to worship him
‘When you pray, say Our Father which art in heaven.’ (Luke 11:2)
Yes pray to God, give thanks to Jesus. Jesus is God so what does he care if you pray to God. lol.
‘In that day, you shall ask me nothing. Whatsoever you ask of the Father in my name.’ (John 16:23)
lol "IN MY NAME" miss that part did ya. Seems we will be asking the father in Jesus name... are you okay with this
‘The hour cometh and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him.’ (John 4:23)
Yes he does
If Jesus was God, he would have sought worship for himself
and be dead in an hour lol
Since he didn’t, instead he sought worship for God in the heavens, therefore, he was not God.
He is going to the heavens to be himself again.. how can he be discouraged by people praising the God in the heaven? He shed the skin and is... omgosh.. a spiritual entity again - back to his old self and lookie lookie the people are praising him ... perfect.
I think i punched enough holes in your thoughts. Its 12:36am. Sorry for not being more explicit.
no offense intended.
happy kaballing
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Ezekiel 33:8-9 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man , thou shall surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thy own hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.
WARN OTHERS!!! There is an Enemy in the camp!!!
Gal 4:14 And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
Did I mention Paul himself told us that "for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."
In John 5:43 MESSIAH SAID I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
How did Saul become Paul? He JUST becomes Paul?
Rev 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast.
Acts 14:11-12 And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker (Jupiter is Zeus, Mercury is Hermes).
The Messiah spoke of the Abomination in Matt 24:15. When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:). The “Holy Place” could also be rendered "In the Place of" Him who is "HOLY"! The parable of the Wheat & Tares illustrates "AN ENEMY CREPT IN AND PLANTED (SEEDS) WORDS" as the means of "STANDING IN THE PLACE OF" THE TRUE WHEAT. LUKE 8:11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
By Using "TARE" WORDS the enemy will "destroy wonderfully," by "creating an illusion" of a "false salvation," EVEN A FALSE MESSIAH!Paul said, in Acts written by Luke, chapter 20, "when I (Paul) leave some will come in even from among your own number and twist and deceive others away from the truth to follow after them," basically. Thank you for your thoughts though.
How did Saul become Paul? He JUST becomes Paul?
Saul is a greek name. Saul was a king who rallied against david. Not a great namesake and speaking of that, Saul was the name of a devilish person who persecuted the church of christ.
As we notice in Acts 9:11 And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prays,
and annais' response:
Acts 9:13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
He recognized the name and trembled - so to speak.
So blame Paul or say what you want about it but I think Paul wanted to disassociate from that hugely tarnished name and he chose Paul, a roman name that means "small". If people heard that Paul was coming they might panick. It would be beneficial in far off countries with those who could not put a face to the name.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Can you Think of a greater masterpiece of DECEPTION than by creating the thirteenth Apostle for a means of delivering "The NEW MESSAGE OF SALVATION!" What a beautiful picture. A murderer from the beginning stops destroying “physically” to do a “wondrous thing”… to deceive and kill spiritually, thru LIES … Let's keep searching the “clues” to unmask how dark and deep this deception goes.
John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
PAUL said in Romans 3:7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner. WHICH LIES WAS HE TALKING ABOUT? LET’S SEE…
Gal 5:6 Behold, I, Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing!
Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
1Cor 7:19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing.
Ezek 44:9 Thus saith YHWH; No stranger, uncircumcised in heart, nor uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into my sanctuary, of any stranger that is among the children of Israel! Are you sure you want to chance believing how UNPROFITABLE circumcision is? To defile the sanctuary is a serious matter!
Why were the people angry at Paul? Let’s turn to Acts 18:13, This fellow persuadeth men to worship God contrary to the law!
Acts 21:28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teaches all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place! *** Notice*** Ezek44:9*** Is it any wonder? Who is standing in the “Holy Place” defiling it? Do we have to go any further "TO OPEN YOUR EYES." IT HAS BEEN RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU ALL THIS TIME!! BUT YOU JUST COULDN’T "SEE IT." These GREEKS WEREN’T CIRCUMCISED.
This was the reason why the people rebuked Paul! They were being obedient to the Torah (Deut 13:1-5).
Acts 13:30 And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut.” Looks like the Temple was cleansed or vindicated, doesn’t it?John 8:44 speaks of cain, cain was a murderer from the beginning. Are there any examples of the devil killing in the beginning? and the devil was a liar in the beginning, of course we know there is no devil or should it be Devil? Gotta wonder why a small d on that word.
Romans 3:7 You need to take this in context. What is paul talking about in the previous verses? He is contrasting the OT and the NT and he is saying in the next verse .. as some (the judiasiers) have slanderously reported us (in christs new way). He is being sarcastic when he says that Gods glory abounds more through his lie... Gods glory cannot abound through a lie.
Gal 5:6 Behold, I, Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing! The OT people were circumcised and they failed at the keeping of the Law and were judged. So Paul says, hey, it doesn't matter if you have foreskin or not only truth and your heart will commend you to God. But those who are keeping the law to the letter still think that eating a shellfish will disinherit them from the kingdom. What could be further from the truth.
Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. How true.
Ezek 44:9 God is talking about the holy of holies. Recall the outer court was called the court of the GENTILES. Gentiles had always been allowed into the temple. Previously there was a low wall dividing the court of the GENTILES from other areas but in EZEKIELS temple vision there is no wall dividing. (fyi) Also note this message goes out to the sons of foreigners, strangers.. who is a stranger to the lord? Those he knows not. Interesting to note that God is aware of the uncircumcision of heart that Paul speaks about, but if a person is a good person it means nothing to God he still doesn't know them.
Acts 18:13. Paul recites the law to the letter because he knows it being a former pharisee, but he preaches Christ crucified and resurrected too. Luke says a year and 6 months and tells of Pauls message from Jesus vs:9,10. The Jews... its always the jews which in this case means judiasers or keepers of the law then take another man and beat him vs 17. something Jesus would never have done. And this is another reason that the law is ended - law does not promote love. It promotes a harsh and hardened way of dealing with things. In 18:21 Paul is desired to stay longer but says that he must attend the feast in jerusalem. hmmm.
Acts 21:28 Lets look at verse 29 first :(for they had seen before with him in the city, Trophimus an Ephesian [a greek christian] whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple <-- G2411 whereas G3485 denotes the central sanctuary. This is none other than a trumped up charge, a lie in fact, because there is the court of the gentiles and no record of Trophimus being stoned. In fact they were not charging Trophimus they just wanted Paul. But God intervened.
If you want to talk about desecrators get a hold of this:
In 175 BC, after Alexander the Great conquered the known world, one of his successors, Antiochus Epiphanes, desecrates the temple by sacrificing a pig on the altar and carrying off temple treasuries. Worship and sacrifices halted, 15 December 167 BC.
No it doesn't look like either. It looks like a bunch of law biders went amok again and are doing things not according to The Jesus Way.Are you sure John 8:44 speaks of Cain?
John 8 (New International Version)
The Children of Abraham
31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples.
32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
33 They answered him, "We are Abraham's descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?"
34 Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.
35 Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever.
36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.
37 I know you are Abraham's descendants. Yet you are ready to kill me, because you have no room for my word.
38 I am telling you what I have seen in the Father's presence, and you do what you have heard from your father."
39 "Abraham is our father," they answered.
"If you were Abraham's children," said Jesus, "then you would do the things Abraham did.
40 As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things.
41 You are doing the things your own father does."
"We are not illegitimate children," they protested.
"The only Father we have is God himself."
The Children of the Devil
42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.
43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say.
44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him.
When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!
46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me?
47 He who belongs to God hears what God says.
The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."
In this chapter Jesus was clearly speaking to the Jews, and Jews are descendants of Judah, the son of Jacob/Israel.
In two of the Lost Books of the Bible, Joel and Deborah wants us to read, it says that Jacob and Judah were responsible for killing Jacob's tween brother Esau.
It has been recorded in the book “Testament of Twelve Patriarch” and “The Book of Jubilees”,
We are told that Jacob/Israel has killed his brother Esau/Edom.
IV.—THE TESTAMENT OF JUDAH (son of Jacob/Israel) CONCERNING
FORTITUDE, AND LOVE OF MONEY, AND FORNICATION.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.iii.vi.html
9. Eighteen years we abode at peace, our father and we, with his brother Esau, and his sons with us, after that we came from Mesopotamia, from Laban.
And when eighteen years were fulfilled, in the fortieth year of my life, Esau, the brother of my father, came upon us with much people and strong; and he fell by the bow of Jacob, and was taken up dead in Mount Seir: even as he went above Iramna was he slain.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.iii.vi.html
The Book of Jubilees
http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/jubilees/38.htm
[Chapter 38]
1.And after that Judah spake to Jacob, his father, and said unto him:
'Bend thy bow, father, and send forth thy arrows and cast down the adversary and slay the enemy; and mayst thou have the power, for we shall not slay thy brother, for he is such as thou, and he is like thee let us give him (this) honour.'
2.Then Jacob bent his bow and sent forth the arrow and struck Esau, his brother (on his right breast) and slew him.
3.And again he sent forth an arrow and struck 'Adoran the Aramaean, on the left breast, and drove him backward and slew him.”
http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/jubilees/38.htm
For killing his brother Esau, God sent Jacob/Israel, with his whole family, into slavery in Egypt for 400 years.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Gal 1:11-12 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
2Tim 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel
What is the definition of blasphemy? Isn’t it defined “Making oneself, or another” equal to the almighty?
When you begin to realize the magnitude of this deception, and then discover how far reaching it is you begin to experience “losing strength” with "great disturbance."
Let's face the facts, Paul preached “Grace” and “Faith,” not “Works.” Compare what Messiah taught in Matt 19:17; John 14:15 and 21, 15:10; 1John 2:3-4; and James 2:17. A few other works based verses are Ezek 18:27, Eccl 12:13, Luke 16:31 and Rev 22:14. Can we safely assume, by Paul’s OWN words, DANIEL IDENTIFIES THIS IS OF THE BEAST'S NATURE.
DANIEL 9:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
Do you think “Cursing YHWH” equates to “Standing up against” or is it possible this is referring to “The REAL PETER” whom Paul blamed (accused)?
Gal 1:24 And they glorified God in me (Paul).
Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed (who is the Accuser?).
Saul immediately began preaching “Christ” and “Confounded The Jews”(Acts 9:20-22). WAIT A MINUTE!!! Saul went away to Arabia for three years (Gal 1:16-18). Which story is true? Let's add up the days that passed from the time the daily sacrifice was taken away or when Messiah was cut off.
1260 days (second half of the seventieth week) plus 1080 days (time alleged Saul who came back as "Paul" went away to Arabia) equals 2340 days. Is it possible “Paul” approximated his three years when in actuality it was almost three years (actually forty days short of three years)? Have you ever ROUNDED OFF A TIME? Like Paul rounded off, actually being away for 320 days (almost a full year), to calling it a full year. Of coarse it's very possible given the two varying accounts of what Saul did after his epiphany.
Dan 7:25 He looks to change times and laws.
We know the reason he looks to change “Laws,” is to cause people to Sin (1John 3:4), but FEW REALIZE , its ALSO to “CONFOUND DANIEL'S PROPHECY” REGARDING “SATANS ENTRY.” - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Deut 13:1-3 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. This of course works with the First Commandment. It specifies “it’s a TEST” to PROVE YOUR LOVE.
Deut 13:4-5 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.
Taking this issue lightly is like casting the first and greatest Commandment to the ground. Ignorance is overlooked for a season, but once we come to the knowledge of the Truth, and refuse it., well all I can say is “That is a frightful thing.” Satan is deceiving people to break the First Commandment.
Are we willing to suffer the persecution, for pointing out the Evil in the MIDST of the “Scriptures”? I AM - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Think About what is said here
Paul said
Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Does the father really justify the wicked?
What does the Torah say about justification?
Ex 23:7 For I will not justify the wicked (ungodly)!
Prov 17:15 He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination. - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Requirements To Be An Apostle
Act 1:22 says Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
Notice…one must have walked with Messiah from the baptism of John, been ordained, and witnessed the Resurrection!
Saul didn’t appear on the scene until 1260 days had passed (Stephen's stoning). Thus, Paul fails the qualifications for the title “Apostle.”
Acts 1:23-26 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
Thus, Matthias was the twelfth Apostle. If anybody was qualified to be A thirteenth Apostle it would have been Barsabas! - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
Acts 14:19 And there came thither certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded the people, and, having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead. Here Paul apparently received a DEADLY WOUND.
Acts 14:20 Howbeit, as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up, and came into the city.” The deadly wound was healed.You are so twisting the scriptures to your own destruction from your last few posts.
Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him, Acts 13:9
He was Also called Paul.
The preacher Ananias confirmed Paul's experience when Paul showed up in Damascus...and Ananias was not with Paul when it happened
Acts 9:17 - And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
God called Paul to be an apostle.
Paul was filled with the Holy Ghost.
Paul preached the same message as Peter and the other apostles.
If Paul was a minister of satan he would not and could not be full of the Holy Ghost.
None of the scriptures you quote from Revelation is about Paul.
Nothing Paul preached was contrary to Jesus' words, his preaching was inspired from God.
There is no contradiction to the time frame in which Paul "immediately preached Christ"********************
Paul did not have the Holy Ghost. All of Paul's stories were his. They were not confirmed.
We never hear of Ananias till Acts 9. We know nothing about him.
One thing the devil does is lie and make you think you're of God when you're not, and obviously Ananais was fooled because God had a plan for Paul and events had to unfold till it was fulfilled.
Paul taught opposite of Yahshua and the Apostles in everything. Have you read it?
No one who has truly studied scripture could possibly say that Yahshua's and Paul's doctrine is the same.
Maybe you are one who isn't suppose to understand.
Matthew 13:13
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
We are judged based on what we were given, not by what we were not given. And we shall surely be judged by our deeds. It is God that reveals all things in this world. The Jews will be judged by the Torah, the Christians will be judged by the Gospel and the Muslims will be judged by the Qur'an. These three faiths are all brothers in God.
God married the Jews to the Torah, but does not reveal the Gospel and the Qur'an to the Jews. God married the Gospel to the Christians and the Christians will be judged by what they do for or against the Gospel. The Christians will not be judged by the Qur'an because God does not reveal it to them. They are cut off from it. And God married the Muslims to the Qur'an and by the Qur'an shall the Muslims be judged.
God gave all of nature to know Him by and many other prophets to those outside the Abrahamic faiths. God seals His faith in every persons hand. We believe or we do not believe.
Verily! Those who believed and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allâh and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. (62) [Quran:Ch2]
mjThe book of Acts was written by Luke not Paul.
Chapter 9 is written by Luke about Pauls experience, Paul tells his experience in chapter 22.
and they were confirmed, in chapter 9:10-17 Ananias was told by God about Paul before Paul got there, vs.11 the Lord said to Ananias to go inquire for one called Saul, vs. 15 the Lord said Saul was a "chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles."
This was not Pauls words they are the writings of Luke about the things that took place during the "Acts of the Apostles".
It does not matter when we hear about Ananias, he has to come on the scene somewhere sometime.
We didn't hear about Peter until he was first mentioned in the gospels, we didn't about Matthew until he was first mentioned in the gospels, or Luke or Thomas etc..
Paul taught the same things that Peter preached and the other apostles, they were all in agreement, otherwise when the apostles heard Paul preach they would have stopped him and corrected him on the spot.
And the scriptures say that Paul received the Holy Ghost and that Paul was full of the Holy Ghost. so you are wrong.*******************
Luke was a close friend of Paul.
Funny how you take up for and condone Paul, but not Yahshua.
We know we can trust Peter because he was constantly with Yahshua, and Yahshua approved of him.And Peter approved of Paul, "2 Peter 3:15
And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,"
Thank you for your thoughts though.
Luke became comrades with Paul later on after his conversion not before, since Luke was close friends of Paul does that mean Luke is a liar as well?
Also others were good friends of Paul like Timothy and Titus, are they also liars.
If Paul was a liar Luke and them would not have kept fellowship with Paul.
I take up for all of them, especially since Jesus Himself called Paul to be a chosen vessel to bear His name, and to be the apostle to the Gentiles.
We can trust Peter, and Peter called Paul a beloved brother, as well as did all the apostle in Acts 15.
If they all found no fault with him why are you?
You give off interpretations of your own linking scriptures together that do not even go together.******************************
Not all scholars believe Peter wrote those books.
It was written in Greek and Peter was a Jew.
He was a fisherman and uneducated. Read here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament
Second Epistle of Peter, ascribed to the Apostle Peter, though widely considered not to have been written by him.
www.earlychristianwritings.com/2peter.html
Read these on this page https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugex … 4&bs=1
Many scholars believe it was written by Paul or tampered with.
Paul hated Peter and bragged about putting Peter in his place.
Peter was suppose to be the Apostle to the Gentiles but Paul took the job anyway.
As far as the scripture I post, you think that they don't go together, many disagree with you, in fact thousands do.
It comes from you not reading the entire Bible.Many biblical authors are unknown. When an author has been attributed it has been selected by pious believers rather than given by the author himself. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are good examples of books which did not carry the names of their actual authors. Not only that but these “authors” were assigned to these writings long after the books were written.
Peter wrote his own epistles regardless of what so called scholars say, many of those so called scholars also say there is a trinity.
"Many scholars believe it was written by Paul or tampered with."
It doesn't matter what the so called scholars believe, it simply not true.
Paul did not hate Peter at all, Paul only confronted Peter because Peter was wrong.
Peter was not supposed to be the apostle to the gentiles, God gave to Peter the keys to the kingdom of God, to open the door to the New T. Church, so Peter went to Cornelius' to Preach the salvation message, opening the door of salvation to the gentiles only, but God called Paul to be the apostle to the gentiles.
and no I don't believe the scriptures you posted about Paul go together, and I study my Bible much.
So just which books of the Bible do you not believe? list those and we can talk about the ones you actually believe are Bible.***********
Paul bragged about it.
Galatians 2:11
But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
Galatians 2:14
But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Peter was not wrong. He was not to eat with Gentiles according to God. And Gentiles were never to enter the Temple.
Hah, Peter was told in a vision and he went to Cornelius who was filled with the Holy Ghost. Cornelius confirmed Peter was suppose to be The Apostle to the Gentiles.
There was no one who confirmed Paul was.
The scripture says there would be two or three witnesses tp confirm the words
Matthew 18:16
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.Peter was told By God to go with the men that came to him not that he was the apostle to the Gentiles and Cornelius did not confirm Peter was to be the apostle to the gentiles.
It was Peters job to open the door of salvation to the Gentiles with keys Jesus gave him.
Peter was wrong, God was showing him in the vision that the Gentiles were not to be called unclean, He was making salvation available to them as well, and so it was not wrong to eat with Gentiles any longer Acts 10:28.
Peter later on was eating with Gentiles until certain Jews showed up then he suddenly did not want to be seen eating with the Gentiles, what he was doing is better known as hypocrisy, and so he was to be blamed.
And I already gave you scripture to prove that God Himself chose Paul. Or are you saying that Luke also is wrong or a liar?*********************************
Luke was a close friend of Paul.
Paul told him what happened (supposedly happened) and Luke wrote it.
Paul had no authority to rebuke Peter.
When Peter found that Paul was preaching to the Gentiles. He said that He (Peter) was suppose to)
Acts 15:7
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Yahshua told his followers to go to his brother in private if he had something against him.
Paul did it in front of everyone.When Peter found that Paul was preaching to the Gentiles. He said that He (Peter) was suppose to)
Peter never told Paul that he (Peter) was supposed to preach to the gentiles.
Acts 15: shows that when Paul got to Jerusalem he was received of the Church and of the apostles and elders, and then it pleased the apostles and elders with the whole Church, to send chosen men of their own company with Paul and Barnabas and in the letter they sent it says "it seemed good unto us, (apostles & elders & the Church) to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas Paul, men who have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
So you think that if Paul was a liar the apostles and elders and the whole Church would not have figured him out right away?
Like I said it was Peters job to go to the gentiles and open the door, but Paul is the apostle to the gentiles, Peter is the apostle to the Jews, although they can preach to any one Jew or gentile.
You are very wrong about Paul, and so are your sources.********************************************************
The Apostles received, meaning they let Paul in. It does not say they did it with joy.
Acts 15:4
4. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
The Elders and others got together to talk about Paul teaching the Gentiles not to be circumcised.
And they disputed with each other over this for a long time.
Acts 15:6,7
6. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Paul is the one who said not to put a yoke on the Gentiles
Acts 15:10
10. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
So JAMES sentenced them not to have to be circumcised. James just gave in to Paul.
Acts 15:19
19Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
The reason they sent two of their men with Paul, was because they wanted to make sure that what was contained in the letter was told to the Gentiles. Just in case, their men would also tell them by mouth.
Why do you think they did this? For one thing, everything spoken was to have two or three witnesses. Another reason is because they wanted to make sure what was said was delivered and not Changed or twisted.
Acts 15: 27-29
27. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.
28. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29. That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
In Acts 13 there was men who were filled with the Holy Ghost who was told to separate Paul and Barnabas from them for the work they were called to do (remember, Judas was called to do a work too, but being called does not mean you are of God)
Acts 13:2,3
2. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
3. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.
They laid their hands on them and sent them away. This is force.
Remember what it says in Jude.
Jude 1:4
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Saul changed his name to Paul. Why do you think?
***********************
What do you think Peter did when he went to Cornelius? He gave the word of God to the Gentiles and they were baptized with the Holy Ghost.
He was suppose to continue, but, Paul took over claiming to be the Apostle of the Gentiles and Peter just let him.
Peter spoke of it in Acts 15, after Paul went there bragging about how many Gentiles he had converted
Acts 15:7
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Acts 4:13 States that Paul is unlearned (Uneducated)
13. Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus. - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Paul's Rebuke
Yahshua had told Peter that he was to go forth and make disciples of all the nations (Matthew 28:19). Later God had revealed to Peter through a vision that he was to enter into a Gentile home and share the gospel. He was a witness to the truth that Gentiles were saved and received the Holy Spirit in the same way that Jews did.
Thus, when Peter comes to Antioch, he expresses his understanding of the unity of the church by freely eating and fellowshipping with Gentiles. This goes on until one day when some visitors arrive from Jerusalem.
2. A Presence from Jerusalem: Prior to the coming of certain men from James (2:12).
These men who now came to Antioch were from James
They demanded that all Jewish believers observe the Law. And they now come to Antioch where Peter and the other Jews have been eating with Gentiles. You can see right away that there is about to be a conflict.
But when they came, he began to withdraw (2:12).
He began to withdraw from the Gentile believers within the church at Antioch.
This indicates that it was a gradual and continued action. Peter didn't stand up in the middle of dinner and walk out. He was much more tactful. He just stopped accepting dinner invitations from Gentiles. When Sunday morning rolled around, Peter was not in church. He was meeting with a group of Jewish believers. A Jewish church was in the making.
Why did Peter do this? Was he abandoning what he had formerly believed? Not at all. He did this because he was intimidated.
Peter had stood before the high priest in Jerusalem and had refused to stop preaching the gospel, though he was beaten and imprisoned and threatened with death. Herod Agrippa had actually sentenced Peter to death and it had only been because of an angelic jailbreak that he was still alive. In spite of all of these experiences, Peter was still afraid when it came to facing these legalistic Christian Jews.
Peter was afraid of what these Jewish Christians were going to think of him. He was afraid that they might carry negative reports about his behavior back to the Jerusalem church. And so he began to make a practice of separating himself from the Gentile believers.
Paul did far worse in jumping on Peter, especially in front of others, than Peter did in withdrawing.
Amazing how people today put Peter down. What would you do if you were Peter. Not what he should have done.well put, thats better than the way I said it.
And I didnt mean he was abandoning what he believed.**************************
Thank you and God bless youAll these clever, logical, truthful, etc. things are not the main reason I believe what I believe, God Jesus Christ our Savior and Lord, it is because I have experienced Him. He radically saved me from a life of fear, anxiety, hatred, bitterness, suicidalness, and so much more. He also radically appeared to me in the summer of 2008 and Saved me out of a three and a half month pit of indescribable hell that I didn't know was possible to experience, and showed me about the Gifts of Holy Spirit without any man teaching me about it Praise God, and have since seen many supernaturally loved, joyful, peaceful, healed, delivered from torment, provided for, etc. the very things that are in the Gospels and Word of God through God praying and moving through me and me through Him, Co-laboring (1Cor. 3). That is really why I believe. Sound truth, thinking, doctrine, teaching, etc. is a bonus and ties all together. Thank you so much. Grace.
*******************************
ROFLOL. I've experienced God, and have seen visions but, neither God nor Yahshua has appeared to me.I greatly doubt Yahshua has to you either. Come on.
Did scales fall from your eyes? Were you told you were an Apostle? You sound just like Paul.
I'm sorry, but you don't have the right attitude for someone who has seen Yahshua. You are sarcastic and demeaning. Why would he appear to you?
I meant that about Peter though, Not Paul.
Simple.. We are all made in the image of god, and are all equal.. We and everything is made up of the likeness of god therfore we all have part of god in us.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Kabbalah: The Misunderstood Doctrine
Kabbalah is one of the most grossly misunderstood parts of Judaism. I have received several messages from non-Jews describing Kabbalah as "the dark side of Judaism," describing it as evil or black magic. On the other end of the spectrum, I receive many messages wanting to learn more about the trendy doctrine popularized by various Jewish and non-Jewish celebrities.
These misunderstandings stem largely from the fact that the teachings of Kabbalah have been so badly distorted by mystics and occultists. Kabbalah was popular among Christian intellectuals during the Renaissance and Enlightenment periods, who reinterpreted its doctrines to fit into their Christian dogma. In more recent times, many have wrenched kabbalistic symbolism out of context for use in tarot card readings and other forms of divination and magic that were never a part of the original Jewish teachings. Today, many well-known celebrities have popularized a new age pop-psychology distortion of kabbalah (I have heard it derisively referred to as "crap-balah"). It borrows the language of kabbalah and the forms of Jewish folk superstitions, but at its heart it has more in common with the writings of Deepak Chopra than with any authentic Jewish source.
These practices are no more "evil" than the miracles of the prophets, or the miracles that Christians ascribe to Jesus. In fact, according to some of my mystically-inclined friends, Jesus performed his miracles using kabbalistic techniques learned from the Essenes, a Jewish sect of that time that was involved in mysticism.
From:
http://www.jewfaq.org/kabbalah.htm" In more recent times, many have wrenched kabbalistic symbolism out of context for use in tarot card readings and other forms of divination and magic that were never a part of the original Jewish teachings."
This gentleman does concede magic is used in the Kabbalah:
"I do not mean to suggest that magic is not a part of Kabbalah. There are certainly many traditional Jewish stories that involve the use of hidden knowledge to affect the world in ways that could be described as magic. The Talmud and other sources ascribe supernatural activities to many great rabbis. Some rabbis pronounced a name of G-d and ascended into heaven to consult with the G-d and the angels on issues of great public concern. One scholar is said to have created an artificial man by reciting various names of G-d. Much later stories tell of a rabbi who created a man out of clay (a golem) and brought it to life by putting in its mouth a piece of paper with a name of G-d on it. However, this area of Kabbalah (if indeed it is more than mere legend) is not something that is practiced by the average Jew, or even the average rabbi. There are a number of stories that discourage the pursuit of such knowledge and power as dangerous and irresponsible. If you see any books on the subject of "practical kabbalah," you can safely dismiss them as not authentic Jewish tradition because, as these stories demonstrate, this kind of knowledge was traditionally thought to be far too dangerous to be distributed blindly to the masses."
So is this guy actually surprised that people associate Kabbalah with the occult? There are also areas of black magic deemed too dangerous to dabble with.
"It is important to note that all of these magical effects were achieved through the power of G-d, generally by calling upon the name of G-d. "
Who is God? Who responds to magic? The devil. Jesus NEVER advocated practising magic. He never advocated secret teachings. This is Gnostic Christian nonsense. They believed Christ came to teach us how to be a Christ. This is an occult belief especially among New Agers.********************************
OK everyone is perverting the Kabbalah.
But that's the fault of the people, not the Jewish systems
Just like there is Christ and Anti-Christ,
The anti-christ perverts something pure
Jewish Mysticism is ancient and pure.
We seek God and Righteousness not Satan
Can you find fault in seeking God?
Darling I have lived Kabbalah for 20 years. When people write
things about Mysticism I can instantly see their errors.
Kabbalah is not of Satan. Only people seek Satan. Please don't try to teach me Kabbalah. I doubt you know anything about it.
You have to copy and paste other people's opinions and errors.
That's why people don't understand what the Bible says, because they take as fact what someone else believes.
See the MYTHS about Kabbalah Above.
Have a nice dayDidn't you copy and paste other people's opinion like the Jewish Kabbalist?
You cannot see the "errors" about Kabbalah because you have been blinded by Satan.
You didn't even now that the Torah is just a spin off of pagan stories. What else don't you know?
You just conveniently ignore my points like that the fact the Kabbalah is an occult teaching. Jesus had nothing to do with the occult. That Jewish Kabbalist even conceded magic is involved. Jesus said that the only way to the Father was THROUGH HIM! Not by studying the Kabbalah and thinking we are extensions of God and that we can become divine ourselves!
You cannot deny you share the same tenets with Freemasons and New Agers, Satanists amongst them, too, like Jack Parsons and Aleister Crowley.
Stop living in denial!*********************
We worship God and not an Idol as you do
Be very careful what you say is of Satan
Mark 3:
29. But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.
30. Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.
And you do know the Hebrews lived in Babylon for many years.
Abraham wrote the sefer Yetzirah which was a divine revelation from God.
And God chose him. He wouldn't have if Abraham was evil. Jesus was of the line of Abraham
Occult means secret or hidden. Yes Jewish Mysticism was secret, but is now open to all. Why do you consider secret to be of the Devil?
You can't know all the things Jesus did and taught, which was a lot
Read
John 21:25
25. And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.Jesus is not an idol. He is the son of God and, at the same time, is one with God.
Say Kabbalah is from Satan is not blasphemous. It's true.
I know the Hebrews lived in Babylon for a long time. How else did they get their beliefs from?
There may have been a man called Abraham but he was not the way he was depicted. Have I not proven to you how tainted the OT is? Look at the occult numerology in the Bible. Surely as a Kabbalist you would have picked that up?
The Elohim were often referred to as God. The Elohim demanded human sacrifices. Why else did you think God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son? What a sick thing to do anyway. How could God have tested him in such a diabolical way?
Whether Jewish mysticism was secret or not, it still is an occult practice. Just like witch-craft.
Oh come on now, it doesn't mean Jesus did things secretly. It just means that all the things He did and said were too numerous to be recorded. Eye witnesses can only recall a limited amount of things, you know.You see Claire,
From the verses below you ca easily figure out that Jesus is the Lord who is sitting beside God. In the last days the Lord Jesus will come to judge the living and the dead.
From the Apostoles' Creed:
" I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come again to judge the living and the dead. "
In heaven, Lord Jesus is seated at the right hand of God.
So, you can say that God and Lord Jesus are same minded - means, Lord Jesus will always do God's will, however, it doesn't mean that They are one Spiritual body.
Kabbalah is not from Satan; Jews got it from Essenes not from Babylon and as Deborah said, it is science and wisdom dealing with pragmatic investigation of reality. Some people find the True some still walk in error.
I don't know what you know about Abraham, but it would be interesting to know your opinion.
Before you judge El, read the Book of Job. It is the oldest book in existence and it will help you to understand who is who.
You have interesting topics on you Hub.So you believe Jesus sanctions occult practices?
It is not true that Kabbalah originated with the Essenes:
"The hidden wisdom of the Hebrew Rabbis of the middle ages derived from the older secret doctrines concerning divine things and cosmogony, which were combined into a theology after the time of the captivity of the Jews in Babylon. All the that fall under the esoteric category are termed Kabalistic.” (Blavatsky, Theosophical Glossary, p. 168)"
Wikipedia says this:
Some Essene rituals, such as daily immersion in the mikvehh, coincide with contemporary Hasidic practices; some historians had also suggested, that name "Essene" is a Hellenized form of the word "Hasidim" or "Hasid" ("pious ones"). However, the legendary connections between Essene and Kabbalistic tradition are not verified by modern historians.
Thanks for my hub compliments.You’re welcome,
Claire,
I didn’t say that Kabbalah originated with the Essenes, what I said was that the Jews got it from the Essenes.
I agree that the Essenes were “pious ones”; however, the name Essenes was derived from the name of their ancestor Esau, not from “Hasidim”.
Esau – in Greek Esai, means “God is salvation, God is great gift”.
In Hebrew the meaning of this name is “he that acts or finishes”. (From Wikipedia)
Esau was renamed as Edom and in the second century B.C. his descendants were peacefully living in Idumea - south of Judea.
Edom in Greek translates to Idumea.
As rulers, the Hasmoneans were far from model Jews.
John Hyrcanus, a son of one of the Maccabee brothers, ruled from 134-104 BC. He forcibly conquered Samaria and Scythopolis. "John's wars of fire and sword were marked by massacres of city populations whose only crime was that they were Greek-speaking.
The province of Idumea was conquered and the inhabitants of its two main cities, Adora and Mariss, were forcibly converted to Judaism or slaughtered if they refused."
The following is from Josephus Antiquities 13:9:1:
"... Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; "
The Idumeans – Essenes, converted to Judaism and were truly pious believers. However, Hyracanus was succeeded by his son, Alexander Jannaeus. When some pious Idumeans - Essenes pelted him with lemons, Jannaeus's response, according to the historian Josephus, was terroristic:
"He was in a rage and slew of them about six thousand." After taking back Jerusalem he "did one of the most barbarous actions in the world for as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of the entire city, he ordered about eight hundred throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes."
The rest of Idumeans – Essenes ended up in Qumran as prisoners until Herod the Great brought them back to Jerusalem.
We know Esau from Genesis, and maybe Deborah can help us to find out more about him because “The Cabalists say that the soul of Esau, whom the Arabs call Ais, passed into the body of Jesus Christ by metempsychosis, and that Jesus and Esau are one.”Thanks for correcting me about the Essenes.
I'd like to know what makes Kabbalists think that Jesus and Esau are one. What in Genesis alludes to this?**************************
I've been a Kabbalist for 20 years and I have never heard this.
The problem is that one person says this and everyone believes it and refuses to listen to those who live it.Deborah, do you mean that for the last twenty years of being Kabbalist you have been studying particularly the Book of Genesis and you never heard about Esau?
I've also noticed that you and Joel are avoiding to write the name Esau. Does for you Esau = G-d?
In Genesis 33 : 10, your ancestor Jacob said to Esau " To see your face is for me like seeing the face of God,"************************
I've never heard of Esau passing through the body of Yahshua.
There are many types of Mystics though.
No we don't view Esau or anyone to be equal to God.*******************
Oh Brother, yes I know about Esau and explained it to you in another post.
But I am in a Jewish Mystic sect that does not hate Esau, nor teach that he passed through Jesus. We do not meditate on Esau, only on God. Where did you read this rubbish that generalizes Kabbalist? Now do you understand?Ma shelomkha? Ani yakhol laazor lekha?
Ani Ohevet Otcha
Hitgaagati eleykha
Ani Tzarich Lalechet Achshav
Ani Etkasher Ele'cha Acharei Hatzohorayim
Ahavah Olam,
Joel
Deborah, several days ago you posted some verses from the Bible which say:
"Adam: ‘Adam, which was the son of God.’ (Luke 3:38)
Jacob is God’s son and firstborn: ‘Israel is my son, even my firstborn.’ (Exodus 4:22)".
From the Genesis we know that Adam = red;
from Genesis we also know that Edom = red, and Edom = Esau.
If Jacob is called God's son and first born, then what about Esau who in fact was the firstborn and tween brother of Jacob?
Do not Kabbalist meditate about it?Deborah, you haven't heard of a lot of things in Kabbalah. Seems you are rather ignorant of your own practices.
Claire, to be honest I don't know.
I'm not Kabbalist and I've found this note about Esau and Jesus in the book about Patriarchs.
Jews in general hate Esau, and create all kinds of lies about him, but so they did about Jesus.
If you read Genesis and apply Christian values, you will find out that he represents image of Christ.
From history and archeology this person - Esau, is even more interesting.
In the archeological records of Summer, Esau is mentioned as Lipit-Eshtar. He was the fifth king of the First Dynasty of Isin.
He instigated legal and economic reform trough his "Code of Lipit-Isthar".
Esau / Lipit-Ishtar drafted a formal legal code for Summer and Akkad in 1930 B.C., which precedes the famous Low Code of Hammurabi a couple centuries later.
His Code was the first legal code to deal substantially with the inheritance of children of plural wives, including slaves wives and prostitutes. It was also the fist to allow daughters to inherit from fathers. It opened a window on social development of the period, including the first legal provision for child support.Sagittarius 2012, Jesus is not mentioned in Genesis or alluded to. What verses in Genesis attests to this?
Claire,
I didn't say that Jesus is mentioned in Genesis. What I said was that the ancient Kabbalist, not the new age ones, were saying that "Esau and Jesus are one". This statement come from the book
Legends of the Patriarchs and Prophets and other Old Testament…
By Sabine Baring-Gould
Esau and Jacob
Page 248
“The Cabalists say that the soul of Esau, whom the Arabs call Ais, passed into the body of Jesus Christ by metempsychosis, and that Jesus and Esau are one.”
I have found this statement very interesting and if you are curious why, and be patient with me (English is my second language), I will try to explain to you my "out of the box" thinking, and share with you what I have found in Genesis. Are you willing to play a "little Kabbalah" and explore Genesis, to search for the greatest story never told ?
To get the big picture we will have to go first to the oldest book of the Bible - The Book of Job.
JOB 1
" 6 One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them.
7 The LORD said to Satan, “Where have you come from?”
Satan answered the LORD, “From roaming throughout the earth, going back and forth on it.”
*******************
I've never heard of it and I've never known of the Jews telling lies on Esau. Give scripture please.OK Deborah,
do you know the meaning of the word "Fornicator" ?
And you know Paul, Saul, St. Paul, Antichrist or whatever you want to call him.
Being born in the tribe of Benjamin he wasn't quite Jew but Israelite, however, being Pharisee he was a Jew.
Now, can you explain to me based on Genesis, why Paul called Esau -Fornicator?**********************
Well, you said Jews not one Jew. It's not right to stereotype.
Of course I know the meaning(s) of fornicator.
Esau was called Edom-Red because he ate the red pottage.
Genesis 25:30
30. And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom.
31. And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright.
32. And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me?
33. And Jacob said, Swear to me this day; and he sware unto him: and he sold his birthright unto Jacob.
34. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright.
When Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob, and sent him away to
Padanaram, to take him a wife from thence; and that as he blessed him he gave him a charge, saying, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan;
He married outside his tribe/race he married the Ishmaelite women
which was worse than marrying a Canaanite. so he was a fornicator. Hebrews were restricted to marrying their own kind. There was a reason for this which I will not get into on the forums
Genesis 28
6. When Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob, and sent him away to Padanaram, to take him a wife from thence; and that as he blessed him he gave him a charge, saying, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughers of Canaan;
7. And that Jacob obeyed his father and his mother, and was gone to Padanaram;
8. And Esau seeing that the daughters of Canaan pleased not Isaac his father;
9. Then went Esau unto Ishmael, and took unto the wives which he had Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of Nebajoth, to be his wife.
AND BTW
Hebrew, Jew, Israelite, Judaic are all the same people from the 12 triblesDeborah, you say that you know the meaning of the word Fornicator, and you say that the Antichrist Paul justly called Esau Fornicator ?
Are you sure you have ever read Torah? because for me it sounds like all you know is the Talmud.
You have no idea about origin of nations; it is all written in Genesis.
Princess Basemath, whom Esau married, was Hagarite, the granddaughter of Abraham and his Egyptian wife Hagar.
According to Islamic tradition, Hagar was the daughter of Egyptian king, who gifted her to Abraham as a wife, thinking Sarah was his sister.
The Bible says that Sarah gave her to Abraham as a wife.
She is the Ancestral Mother of Hagarites.
Ishmael, the first born of Abraham and his Egyptian wife Hagar, become the father of twelve sons. In Genesis 25:16 (KJV) you can read:
"This are the sons of Ishmael, and this are their names, by their towns, and by their castles; twelve PRINCES according to their nations."
Ishmael also had a daughter, princess Basemath who was married to Esau, the first born and beloved son of Isaac.
In the archaeological record of Sumer, Ishmael is listed as Ishme-Dagan and he is the fourth king of the First Dynasty of Isin.
Deborah, as you have noticed, to please his parents Esau went to his uncle and married princess Basemath.
With this marriage, Esau / Lipit-Eshtar, inherited from his uncle and father in Law the throne of Isin, and become the fifth king of the First Dynasty of Isin.
Esau, a Shepard and farmer from Nippur, ruled Isin from 1934 to 1924 B.C.
"Some documents and royal inscriptions from his time has survived, but he is mostly known because Sumerian language hymns written in his honor, as well as legal code written in his name (preceding the famed Hammurabi Code by about 200 years), were used for school instruction for hundreds of years after his death."
Princess Basemath is the Ancestoral Mother of Ishmaelites and she bore to Esau a son whose name was Reul.
Reul (name meaning - Friend of God), had a son whose name was Zare.
Zare was the father of Job and grandfather of Jethro.
Job - author and protagonist of the Book of Job.
Jethro - father in law of Moses.
Deborah, you surly know the story of Job and Jethro from your Talmud, when they were Pharos advisers.
Job is also mentioned in The Book of Jasher, one of the lost books of the Bible, which you are recommending on your Hub.****************
I have read every Jewish Writing. I study the Tanakh daily.
Just because you've picked out why which disagrees with my why means nothing.
I never said Paul rightfully called Esau a fornicator. Stop putting words in my mouth.
Paul had no right to be in the Bible, but he is.
You asked why he said it, and he used marrying outside his Tribe as an excuse to call Esau that.
Now stop asking me questions. I will not respond to you again.
Sagittarius 2012, this is another instant where the Torah is in conflict with Kabbalah texts.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
10 MYTHS about KABBALAH
Myth #1: Kabbalah is a religion.
Fact: Kabbalah is a science - the physics of the overall reality. It is a wisdom that reveals the comprehensive reality that is normally hidden from our senses.
Myth #2: Kabbalah is connected to red strings and holy water.
Fact: There is no connection. Red strings, holy water and other products are a lucrative commercial invention created in the past two decades.
Myth #3: Kabbalah is reserved for a minority of persons and only men over 40 years of age are allowed to learn it.
Fact: During the exile Kabbalah was only studied by a few select individuals. However, since the time of the Ari (the 16th century), it is available to all.
Myth #4: Kabbalah deals with magic.
Fact: Kabbalah does not deal with magic or any other sorcery; rather, it deals with a pragmatic investigation of reality.
Myth #5: Kabbalah is a sect.
Fact: Kabbalah is a wisdom and a science open to every person without any restrictions.
Myth #6: Kabbalah is related to “New Age” and is a trend - a passing phenomenon.
Fact: Kabbalah is humanity’s oldest wisdom. Its beginnings were approximately 5,000 years ago.
Myth #7: Kabbalah is related to tarot cards, astrology and numerology.
Fact: Tarot cards, astrology and numerology, in their mystical practice, have been mistakenly associated with Kabbalah.
Myth #8: There are amulets in Kabbalah.
Fact: In our world, there are no physical objects that bear any spiritual contents. Amulets can only help a person as a psychological support.
Myth #9: Kabbalah involves meditation.
Fact: Kabbalah does not involve meditation. Meditation is another element that was connected to the word “Kabbalah” amid its confusion in the last few centuries by non-Kabbalists.
Myth #10: One needs to have studied the Torah and Talmud prior to approaching Kabbalah books.
Fact: Without Kabbalah, one cannot understand the spiritual meaning of these texts, and is stuck with thinking that they refer to physical events and actions.
WHAT Kabbalah IS
The wisdom of Kabbalah is the most ancient of all wisdoms. It goes back to the time of Abraham the Patriarch, in the 18th century BC, 3800 years ago. Abraham the Patriarch was an ordinary Bedouin tribesman in Babylon, who discovered the existence of Godliness, a reality outside this world. He then wrote a book about it called Sefer Yetzira (The Book of Creation), which is actually the very first book about the wisdom of Kabbalah.The OT is encoded in mysticism. The occult numbers in it proves that. Take away the mysticism in it and be left with the literal translation of the OT and you get a very different version indeed.
I'm not sure if you are aware that Satan is often depicted as a bisexual deity. Take, for example, Baphomet and Artemis, then both having female and male body parts.
Referring to the Sephiroth (the ten Kabbalistical attributes of God)
"Among these Sephiroth, jointly and severally, we find the development of the persons and the attributes of God. Of these, some are male and some are female. Now, for some reason or other, best known to themselves, the translators of the Bible have carefully crowded out of existence and smothered up every reference to the fact that the Deity is both masculine and feminine. They have translated a feminine plural by a masculine singular in the case of the word Elohim. They have, however, left an inadvertent admission of their knowledge that it was plural in Genesis iv., 26: 'And Elohim said: Let US make man.'
http://www.sacred-texts.com/wmn/wb/wb59.htm
“The Kabbalah--the Hebrew esoteric doctrines--is a system of teachings with which only the very learned attempt to wrestle. It is claimed to have been handed down by oral tradition from angelic sources, through Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, the Seventy Elders, to David and to Solomon”
I don’t know if you are aware that Solomon was a black magician.
Look at this verse 1 Kings 10:14
The weight of the gold that Solomon received yearly was 666 talents,
Read this:
In the Kabbalistic scheme, God is neither matter nor spirit, but is the creator of both. The question of the Divine nature prompted Kabbalists to envision two aspects of God: (a) God Himself, who is ultimately unknowable, and (b) the revealed aspect of God that created the universe, preserves the universe, and interacts with mankind. Kabbalists speak of the first aspect of God as Ein Sof (אין סוף); this is translated as "the infinite", "endless", or "that which has no limits". In this view, nothing can be said about the essence of God. This aspect of God is impersonal. The second aspect of Divine emanations, however, is at least partially accessible to human thought. Kabbalists believe that these two aspects are not contradictory but, through the mechanism of progressive emanation, complement one another (See Divine simplicity). The structure of these emanations has been characterized in various ways: Sefirot (Divine attributes) and Partzufim (Divine "faces"); Four Worlds of Creation in a Seder hishtalshelus (Descending Chain of realms), Azilut, Beriyah, Yitzirah, and Asiyah; the Biblical vision by Ezekiel of the Merkabah (Divine angelic "Chariot"). These alternatives are harmonized in subsequent Kabbalistic systemisation. The central metaphor of Ohr ("Light") is used to describe Divine emanations.
Medieval Kabbalists believed that all things are linked to God through these emanations, making all levels in Creation part of one great, gradually descending chain of being
Through this any lower creation reflects its particular characteristics in Supernal Divinity. These descriptions reached their synthesis in 16th century CE Cordoveran Kabbalah. This metaphysical explanation gave cosmic significance to the deeds of man as the downward flow of the Divine "Light" that creates our reality that is opened or restricted according to the merits of each individual. Divine substenance in Creation is dependent on the traditional mitzvah observances of Judaism. Subsequent Kabbalah of Isaac Luriadescribes a radical origin to this depiction, where Creation unfolds from transcendent imbalance in Godliness, and the purpose of life is the Messianic rectification of Divinity by man. Once each person has completed their part of the rectification, the Messianic Era begins. In this, the mitzvot redeem the supernal Divine Sparks in existence
Who is the light and divine spark:
Albert Pike, Freemason:
"Lucifer, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable, blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish souls? Doubt it not!" [Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, p. 321, 19th Degree of Grand Pontiff; Red Emphasis added]
Tell me if the following paragraph rings a bell:
The day has come when Fellow Craftsman must know and apply their knowledge. The lost key to their grade is the mastery of emotion , which places the energy of the universe at their disposal. Man can only expect to be entrusted with great power by proving his ability to use it constructively and selflessly. When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands, and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply energy. He must follow in the footsteps of his forefather,Tubal-Cain, who with the mighty strength of the war god hammered his sword into a plowshare." [Manly P. Hall, 33rd Degree, K.T., The Lost Keys of Freemasonry or The Secret of Hiram Abiff , Forward by Reynold E. Blight, 33rd Degree, K.T., Illustrations by J. Augustus Knapp, 32nd Degree, Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, p. 48; Emphasis Added]
So who gives Masons their divine spark? Lucifer.
"To conceive of God ... the Kabala imagined Him to be a 'most occult light'." [Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, p. 740]
"Freemasonry is a search for Light. That search leads us directly back, as you see, to the Kabalah." [Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma , p. 741
"Albert Pike states "All truly dogmatic religions have issued from the Kabbalah and return to it. Everything scientific and grand in the religious dreams of all the Illuminati: Jacob, Boehome, Swedenborg, St-Martin, and others; is borrowed from the Kabbalah....the Kabbalah alone consecrates the alliance of the Universal Reason With Faith, Power With Liberty, Science With Mystery; It has the keys of the present, the past and the future....Lucifer, the Light Bearer!....Lucifer, the Son of the Morning!....Is it he who bears the light?....Doubt it not!" (Morals And Dogmas, Albert Pike, pg. 321, 744, 745).
To be a member of the Illuminati at the level Pike was, he had to have access to occult knowledge that was only available to the worthy. People like him and Crowley know exactly what Kabbalah means.
http://www.cuttingedge.org/free14.html
Do you see that Kabbalah is all about the aim of becoming God? A Christ per se? That is the exact belief from occultists like New Agers, Freemasons and Theosophists. Satan has many creative ways to ensnare people. And so you see, Kabbalah teachings don’t originate with the Jews. Those ancient mysteries preceded them a long time ago. The ancient Egyptian mysteries are all the same.
Watch video about Kabbalah:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frw6W1Ui … re=related
It's just interesting that you mention Abraham coming from Babylon. Babylon is associated with wickedness:
Revelation 17:5
And upon her forehead was a name written,
MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT,
THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS
AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
"According to the nineteenth century historian, Alexander Hislop, most dependable historians agree that Babel (Babylon) was the primal source from which all idolatry spread to the ancient world.
Another historian, Ralph Woodrow, concluded that to this present time, evidence of Babylonian worship exists in "all the false religions of the earth." (Babylon, Mystery Religion-Ralph Woodrow).
Beginning at Babylon and finding its' way into all ancient societies was the teaching of "Pantheism". Pantheism teaches that all forces, manifestations, etc. of the universe are god. (Sun worship, animal deification, etc.) This is the same doctrine being propagated today as "New Age". This teaching has been a threat to humanity throughout the ages. It was a very real threat even during the time of the Apostles. (See Romans 1:20-32)
However the main god of Babylon was a god represented by an equilateral triangle, or as a single body with three heads. This is the most ancient depiction of the "trinity". Even in this modern age, Buddhist, Hindus and Catholics still retain a "trinity" as their god. They also still retain certain symbols (the equilateral triangle, etc.) as the symbol of god."
You say you are receiving visions? I'm deeply concerned for you. I truly pray you turn away from this Satanic Kabbalah.Quote "I'm not sure if you are aware that Satan is often depicted as a bisexual deity. Take, for example, Baphomet and Artemis, then both having female and male body parts."
That's not bisexual, that's hermaphrodite.With the case of body parts, you are correct, but a god is often depicted as male some times and female other times.
*******************************
The Freemasons did not come into existence until the late 16th and early 17th Centuries, long after Jewish Mysticism, and KabbalahWhy don't we go to the roots of Kabbalah instead of later adaptions which is just veiling its original meaning. Quite clever actually.
Freemasonry is based on the ancient mysteries of Egypt. Kabbalah is also based on that. Excerpts from pages I've consulted:
Freemasons go back to the Mystery Religions of Egypt and Babylon, which were also very secreted societies. They consisted of a priesthood craft that kept the highest esoteric learning of that time confined to their inner circle and basically used their knowledge to manipulate and control the rest of the populace.
This is a theme that is traceable throughout all secret societies. Recall Moses was sent by the Angel of Yahweh into Egypt to show the tremendous power and “signs and wonders of the Holy Spirit.” Moses was about to confront the “great power” of the Egyptian priesthood who were actually magicians and masterful sorcerers (Jannes and Jambres), and who had extensive esoteric knowledge.
These priests used this knowledge to deceive the people and even to manipulate the rulers of Egypt. For example, it has been recently revealed that the ancient Egyptians employed electric eels to produce ‘electric shock’ for purposes of mind control.
“The Egyptians, in the time of Moses, were proficient in all the arts and sciences,* ... Their language was mystical, and their priests secured the mysteries of their religion from the knowledge of the vulgar or uninitiated by symbols and hieroglyphics, comprehensible alone to those of their order. The fraternity of ancient Egypt was denominated by the Hiero-Laotomi, or Sacred Builders. They were a selected caste, and connected with the government and priesthood, being in fact Masons of the priestly order; whilst the ordinary Masons or articifers were of an inferior caste... Moses was initiated into the secrets and mysteries of the priestly order when in Egypt...(A Dictionary of Freemasonry , pg. 8)”
http://www.plim.org/Freemasonp1.htm
The statue that the Jews worshipped when they departed from their true religion was, according to many researchers, was an Egyptian idol made of gold in the form of a calf.
One of the important facts concerning the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, as related in the Qur'an, is that some of them rebelled against the religion revealed to them by God in spite of the fact that God had rescued them through Moses from the tyranny of Pharaoh. Some of the Israelites were not able to comprehend the monotheism that Moses communicated to them, but tended continually toward idolatry."
The only explanation for this is that although the Israelites adhered to a monotheistic belief, some of them were influenced by the pagan peoples among whom them lived, and began to imitate them, replacing the religion chosen for them by God with the idolatry of foreign nations.
When we investigate this matter in light of historical records, we see that the pagan cult that influenced the Israelites was that of Ancient Egypt. An important evidence in support of this conclusion is that the golden calf the Israelites worshipped, while Moses was on Mt. Sinai, was actually a replica of the Egyptian idols Hathor and Aphis. In his book, Too Long in the Sun, the Christian author Richard Rives writes:
Quote
"Hathor and Aphis, the cow and bull gods of Egypt, were representatives of sun worship. Their worship was just one stage in the long Egyptian history of solar veneration. The golden calf at Mount Sinai is more than sufficient evidence to prove that the feast proclaimed was related to sun worship.23"
While Moses was still alive, some Israelites began to create likenesses of the idols they had seen in Egypt and to worship them. After Moses died, some among them backslid farther into perversity. Of course, the same thing cannot be said of all Jews, but some of them did adopt Egyptian paganism. Indeed, they carried on the false doctrines of Pharaoh's magicians, that lay at the foundation of that society's beliefs, and corrupted their own faith by introducing these doctrines into it.
The false doctrine that was introduced into Judaism from Ancient Egypt was also introduced into the Kabbalah. Like the system of the Egyptian priests, it was an esoteric system, and its basis was the practice of magic. Interestingly, the Kabbalah provides an account of creation quite perverted from that found in the Torah. It is a materialist account, based on the Ancient Egyptian mistaken idea of the eternal existence of matter. Murat Ozgen, a Turkish Freemason, has this to say on this topic:
Quote
It is evident that the Kabbalah was composed many years before the Torah came into existence. The most important section of the Kabbalah is a theory about the formation of the universe. This theory is very different from the story of creation accepted by theist religions. According to the Kabbalah, at the beginning of creation, things called Sefiroth, meaning "circles" or "orbits," with both material and spiritual characteristics came into being. The total number of these things was 32. The first ten represented the solar system and the others represented the masses of stars in space. This particularity of the Kabbalah shows that it is closely connected to ancient astrological systems of belief... So, the Kabbalah is far removed from Jewish religion and much more closely related to the ancient mystery religions of the East.24
The Jews, by adopting these Ancient Egyptian materialist and esoteric doctrines that were founded on magic, ignored the related prohibitions in the Torah. They took on the magic rituals of other pagan peoples, and thus, the Kabbalah became a mystical doctrine within Judaism, but contrary to the Torah.
These pagan ideas that were introduced into the Torah must have an origin. There must have been Jews who adopted, honored and cherished a tradition foreign to the Torah, and changed the latter by adding into it ideas derived from the tradition they espoused. The origin of this tradition stretches back to the priests of Ancient Egypt (the magicians of Pharaoh's regime). It is, in fact, the Kabbalah which was passed on from there by a number of Jews. The Kabbalah assumed a form that enabled Ancient Egyptian and other pagan doctrines to insinuate themselves into Judaism and develop within it. Kabbalists, of course, assert that the Kabbalah simply explains in more detail the hidden secrets of the Torah, but, in reality, as Jewish historian of the Kabbalah, Theodore Reinach, says, the Kabbalah contains "a subtle poison which enters into the veins of Judaism and wholly infests it."26
It is possible, then, to find in the Kabbalah clear traces of the materialist ideology of the Ancient Egyptians.
Kabbalistic experience engendered several perceptions about the Divine, many of which departured from the orthodox view. The most central tenet of Israel's faith had been the proclamation that "our God is One." But Kabbalah asserted that while God exists in highest form as a totally ineffable unity-called by Kabbalah Ein Sof, the infinite-this unknowable singularity had necessarily emanated into a great number of Divine forms: a plurality of Gods. These the Kabbalist called Sefiroth, the vessels or faces of God. The manner by which God descended from incomprehensible unity into plurality was a mystery to which Kabbalists devoted a great deal of meditation and speculation. Obviously, this multifaceted God image admits to accusations of being polytheistic, a charge which was vehemently, if never entirely successfully, rebutted by the Kabbalists.
Not only was the Divine plural in Kabbalistic theosophy, but in its first subtle emanation from unknowable unity God had taken on a dual form as Male and Female; a supernal Father and Mother, Hokhmah and Binah, were God's first emanated forms. Kabbalists used frankly sexual metaphors to explain how the creative intercourse of Hokhmah and Binah generated further creation...27
An interesting feature of this mystical theology is that, according to it, human beings are not created, but are in some way divine. Owens describes this myth:
Quote
The complex Divine image .was also visualized by Kabbalah as having a unitary, anthropomorphic form. God was, by one Kabbalistic recension, Adam Kadmon: the first primordial or archetypal Man. Man shared with God both an intrinsic, uncreated divine spark and a complex, organic form. This strange equation of Adam as God was supported by a Kabbalistic cipher: the numerical value in Hebrew of the names Adam and Jehovah (the Tetragrammaton, Yod he vav he) was both 45. Thus in Kabbalistic exegesis Jehovah equaled Adam: Adam was God. With this affirmation went the assertion that all humankind in highest realization was like God.28
This perverted theology comprises of a mythology of paganism, and formed the basis of the degeneration of Judaism. Some Jewish Kabbalists breached the limits of common sense to such an extent that they even tried to make human beings into supposed deities. In addition, according to this false theology, not only was humanity divine, but it consisted only of Jews; other races were not considered human. As a result, faith in the one Almighty God and serving Him began to be replaced by pagan beliefs and practices. These false beliefs then led to the corruption of the Torah and the inclusion within it of various ideas incompatible with true religious moral values.
Another interesting point about the corrupt doctrines in the Kabbalah is its similarity to the pagan ideas of Ancient Egypt. As we have discussed in earlier pages, the Ancient Egyptians erroneously believed that matter had always existed; in other words, they rejected the idea that matter was created from nothing. Some sections of the Kabbalah assert the same thing in relation to human beings; it falsely claims that human beings were not created, and that they are responsible for their own existence.
To state it in modern terms: the Ancient Egyptians were materialists, and the doctrine of some sections in the Kabbalah can be called secular humanism.
It is interesting to note that these two erroneous concepts—materialism and secular humanism—describe the ideology that has dominated the majority of the world over the last two centuries.
It is tempting to ask if there are forces who have carried the doctrines of Ancient Egypt and the Kabbalah from the midst of ancient history to the present day.
n Foucault's Pendulum, the Italian novelist, Umberto Eco, relates these facts in the course of the plot. Throughout the novel, he relates, through the mouths of its protagonists, how the Templars were influenced by the Kabbalah and that the Kabbalists possessed a secret that could be traced back to the Ancient Egyptian pharaohs. According to Eco, some prominent Jews learned certain secrets taken from the Ancient Egyptians, and later inserted these into the first five books of the Old Testament (Pentateuch). But, this secret, which was transmitted secretly, could be understood only by the Kabbalists. (The Zohar, written later in Spain, and forming the fundamental book of the Kabbalah, deals with the secrets of these five books) After stating that the Kabbalists read this Ancient Egyptian secret also in the geometric measurements of the temple of Solomon, Eco writes that the Templars learned it from the Kabbalist rabbis in Jerusalem:
Quote
The secret-what the Temple already said in full-is suspected only by a small group of rabbis who remained in Palestine. And from them the Templars learn it.30
n Babylon, these heretical Jews, who refused to purge their religion of pagan influences, instead added to them the adopted practices of Babylonian magic. However, knowing that magic was forbidden in Judaism, they rejected the God of Israel, choosing instead to honor Lucifer, who they identified with the traditional enemy of the Hebrew faith, Baal. In order not to reveal their apostasy, they disguised their hidden faith as an “interpretation” of the religion, a cult now known as the Kabbalah.
This development is carefully described in the Koran, which explains that, though it was claimed the Kabbalah was derived originally from King Solomon, it was demons who taught such things, teaching them that which had been revealed to the angels Harut and Marut in Babylon
http://waronyou.com/forums/index.php?topic=15669.5;wap2Congratulation Claire, you are one big step closer to the roots.
I understand, you are talking about the Ancient Masons not the Scottish Rite Ruth was mentioning, and the old Kabbalist not the NWO version.
Next you will have to find out where Moses and the Pharos of Moses time get the knowledge from.
Saggitarius, there is no difference between Ancient Masons and Scottish Rite Masons. Masonry today is based on the ancient Egyptian mysteries. The eye in the pyramid is the eye of Horus, an important symbol in Masonry.
“We have therefore, in the 24th degree (Masonic Ritual), recited the principal incidents in the legend of Osiris and Isis … Everything good in Nature comes from Osiris… Osiris was the image of generative power. This was expressed by his symbolic statues … Osiris and Isis were the Sun and Moon … and is the All-Seeing Eye in our Lodges … Osiris was invoked as the God that resides in the Sun” (Morals and Dogma, Albert Pike, pgs. 474-477: Freemason and Illuminati member)"
The Scottish Rite originated with Albert PikeClaire, the difference is like between the heaven and the hell.
One of the original Masons was George Washington.
American Masons were called anti - Semites.
"The Library of Congress contains the George Washington Papers, which may be viewed online. A search inquiry yielded archives which contain actual photographs of original documents either written to or by Washington. The reader may view these documents in their original form. We have also transcribed certain of these letters which demonstrate, not only Washington's close ties to Freemasonry, but his position as Grand Master of the Alexandria Lodge No. 22 of Virginia.
Although Washington's correspondence with the Masonic Lodges is replete with Masonic references to the Great Architect of the Universe, his response to a Christian clergyman conspicuously avoids mention of Jesus Christ or acknowledgement of personal Christian faith. Washington also defended American Freemasonry and denied that American Masonic societies were connected to English Freemasonry or contaminated with the subversive principles of the Illuminati."Are you denying that all branches of Freemasonry are based on the Ancient Egyptian mysteries? Whatever you wrote of Washington is irrelevant. Their roots are the same.
Dear Claire,
The ancient Free Masons, also called Operative Masons or American Free Masons, made their living cutting and laying stones and bricks. They build houses, churches, cities, like Washington DC, and entire countries like USA.
Two of the famous American Free Masons were George Washington and Benjamin Franklin.
The new Free Masons also called Speculative
Freemasons of English or Scottish Rite, are men who seek to improve their morality through the lessons and rituals of Freemasonry. One of the famous one was Albert Pike.
Guess what did they build?
A New World Order
Claire,
what do you mean by the Ancient Egyptian Mysteries?Freemasons used sacred geometry to build these structures. Sacred geometry was used in the gothic architecture of European churches and cathedrals (Chartres) and the Parthenon in Athens, paintings by Leonardo Da Vinci and the Hindu classical dance. Da Vinci was a Freemason and polymath, scientist, mathematician, engineer, inventor, etc.
And Pike said, "“He was Sirius or the Dog-Star, the friend and counselor of Osiris, and the inventor of language, grammar, astronomy, surveying, arithmetic, music, and medical science; the first maker of laws; and who taught the worship of the Gods, and the building of temples.” (Pike, 376) "
Excerpt from page consulted:
It is now believed that the Egyptians applied sacred geometry in the construction of the Great Pyramid and many other monuments. The Egyptians had two mystery-schools; one was called the left eye of Horus. This school taught the female principles of creation, about love and compassion. The other school was called the right eye of Horus and taught the intelligent male principles of creation; sacred geometry was a main subject.
http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/SODA_chapter5.html
Very interesting page.
So you see how both the Kabbalah and Freemasonry go back to the ancient Egyptian mysteries? And do you understand now why Washington has an obelisk and why the one dollar bill has the eye of Horus on it?
***************************
These are Opinions from Non-Mystics. I can show you many writings that say Christians are pagan. Want me to find them.
Does it mean you are Pagan? or just some Non-Christian's opinion?LOL! Don't talk absolute nonsense Deborah. Refute my points. Are you telling me the Jews did not worship Egyptian idols and were influenced by Ancient Egypt? Didn't Moses grow up in Egypt?
I'll get back to you on the paganism in Christianity.*********************
You missed my point, I didn't say Christians are pagan. I said, now pay attention, that I can find many non-christian sites that say Christians are pagans and the anti-christ. Just as you find all of the non-mystic sites that says bad stuff about mystic.
I never said Jews never worshiped idols. It's in the bible.. they got seduced by non-jewish women. Stop misquoting me.I didn't say you said Christians are pagan. When I look at a religion, I look at what it originally was, not what was added later. Paganism entered into the Christian religion 300 years after Jesus death and resurrection. That should be evident by December 25th, Easter eggs, Christmas tree and Mary worship. However, this is not what Christianity was founded upon. Kabbalah, on the other hand, always had the objective to know the mind of God and to use spells. Can you prove to me that ancient Kabbalists never practiced magic?
I am not here to antagonize you. I actually do care and hate seeing Satan getting his way. Perhaps the most Satanic institution on earth is the Vatican. I wouldn't be surprised if the Anti-Christ doesn't come from there although I've read good arguments that he is actually going to be Muslim.
The Egyptians were also mystical and their knowledge was secret available to the few. Sound familiar? It's pretty obvious where Kabbalah came from. If Moses grew up in an Egyptian household, well, he would have picked up a thing or two.
What in my comment do you not agree with?
***************************************
Claire, you need to come out of the Anti-Christ movement before it's too late
From http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_3.html
"It is plain that this beast represents false religion. Preaching and teaching make men worship something or someone. But this is false teaching and lying preaching. That's evident from the fact that this beast looks like a lamb, looks like Jesus Christ and all that Jesus Christ represents, but in actuality is a beast. He claims to speak like Jesus, but has the foul breath and fiery speech (in the eyes and nostrils of God) of a dragon.
This beast will not arise from Hinduism or Buddhism or any other pagan religion; he will arise out of Christianity itself. Few Christians would believe a Ghandi's claim to be Christ. When one looks at Revelation 19:20, that becomes obvious. There, in the passage that describes the defeat of Antichrist, we read that the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that worked miracles before the beast. This second beast represents false Christianity, the apostate church that calls itself "the Church of Christ" (we mean by this designation the broad "church," and do not intend it to be confused with a certain denomination of that name)"
The work of the second beast is the service of the first, the cooperating with the Antichristian world government. What is that service? It is causing all the world to worship the first beast. He will call all men and women of the world to bow down to the first beast, who is the "Savior of the world." Now the prophecy of Revelation 17 comes to pass: the kings of the earth commit fornication with the whore, the false church.
If one asks what he should look for in the days to come, we say this: there will be political union all nations will be gathered together into one mighty empire. This is the first beast. There will also be religious union, joining all the religions and religious empires of the world. The powerful ecumenical movement of today, led by the religions of Christianity, will in the end fully succeed, swallowing up all the other religions of the world. You may expect to see one man over it all. Antichrist.
AND, who is this? The Christians
John 16:1-4
1. I am telling you this to keep you from being afraid.
2. You will be chased out of the Jewish meeting places. And the time will come when people will kill you and think they are doing God a favor.
3. They will do these things because they don't know either the Father or me.
4. I am saying this to you now, so that when the time comes, you will remember what I have said.Hey guess what? Satanists have infiltrated the Christian church. So that suddenly makes Christianity evil? Wow. You need to take your blinkers off for your own safety.
Lucifer does not exist. He is a result of poor translation and misunderstanding of Isaiah 14. Isaiah was talking about the sudden and unexpected fall of the king of Babylon: read the entire chapter. The son of the dawn was the son of the Canaanite pagan goddess of the dawn. In Canaanite legend, he was found to be proud so was bitch-slapped to the Earth. Isaiah is simply drawing a parallel between his sudden unexpected demise and that of Nebuchadnezzar (writing on the wall event). The fall of this morning star was a myth that was not believed by Isaiah but he used it as a literary device.
Lol, then go tell that to New Agers, Freemasons and Satanists. I've got a feeling they won't agree with you. It doesn't matter what name Satan goes by. It's still Satan.
If the name doesn’t matter, and if ‘satan’ likes to trick humans, then that name could just as easily be jesus. It is told that satan will disguise himself as an angel of light. What an ingenious way to lead people away from praying directly to God.
Pardon the pun but the devil is truly in the details.
BTW, Jesus never said hell, he referred to the Valley of Hinnom which was the garbage dump outside of Jerusalem where they burned prisoners. At the time it was aid to be the worst thing a person could experience. Hell is from Greek mythology, as is Hades. Hell was first written about in a fictional story called The Divine Comedy written by Dante Alighieri in 1308. At first the church was upset by this story by Dante, but after they saw how it filled their churches and made them money they embraced and embellished it. When the old testament was translated to Greek they did not have an equivalent word for Sheol, so the translators chose Hades.*******************
You are correct. The Hebrews never have and never will believe in Hell.
Satan just means adversary. The New Agers also do not believe in either one.
And if there is any True Satanist, they are hidden pretty well.
What is Satanism? The answers here http://www.joyofsatan.org/
This Claire is a scholar now.Deborah: The New Agers believe in Lucifer who is one and the same as Satan.
That page you posted is truly frightening. It is also comprised of utter lies. I'll go by what the real Satanists do like Aleister Crowley. He performed plenty of child sacrifices.
Yes, true Satanists in power of the world do hide their Satanism well. Not many know George W Bush is, for example.I couldn't care less whether Satanists and New Agers agree with me or not; Satan as believed by the Church et al simply does not exist. Satan is simply a generic term for accuser or one that opposes. If you read Numbers 22:22 in the Hebrew, the Angel of the Lord is a satan to Balaam. A satan can be an angel sent from God for a specific purpose or a human, such as David was to the philistines.
If you prefer to believe that mental illnesses such as bipolar disorders, depression and Tourette's that Jesus dlivered people from are demons, then please feel free. But believing in something does not make it true.
By the way, I'll be telling George what you said about him.So you are saying that an angel of the Lord is Satan? Then why does Jesus say...
"Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand; and if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you" (Matthew 12:24-28 RSV)
Who was Jesus referring to when He said:
"Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear My word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."?
I never claimed those with mental illnesses were demons exorcised by Jesus. Don't put words into my mouth.I'm saying this angel of the lord was A satan. One of many as it is a generic term, not the name of an entity.
Demons and the arch fiend Satan are not found in Judaism and they are not found in the Hebrew scriptures. Therefore anyone who actually believed in them 2000 years ago believed in unbiblical ideas.
These things were assimilated into Jewish beliefs and culture from Zoroastrianism which the Jews were exposed to during there time in exile. On the surface zorastrianism shares many beliefs with Judaism such as one God and a long awaited future messiah. However, in zorastrianism, the evil in the world is attributed to demons led by Ahriman.
Now despite God saying in Isaiah 45:7 that He forms the light and the darkness, good and evil, the idea that God could bring evil upon men became unpalatable. So the Jews adopted the Zoroastrian concept of the origins of evil, and thus Satan who was formerly understood to be God's faithful servant sent to accuse Israel and keep them faithful ( see Job) , was evolved into an enemy of God. The Jews also adopted the concept of demons as this new rebranded Satan needed a hoard of helpers. So by the time Jesus comes along, Satan and demons are now fully integrated into Jewish superstition, and by inheritance, the Catholic Church.
Now many in Jesus time believed that sickness was a result of sin, and that they needed forgiveness before they could have sufficient faith for healing (see the man lowered through the roof). In the same way, others believed sickness and especially mental illnesses we're the result of demon possession, and that they needed deliverance before they had faith for healing. So rather than enter a religious debate with people about the origins of sickness, Jesus plays along with their superstitions for the sake of their faith to be healed. Imagine if he said demons did not exist; people would have gone about saying that he couldn't heal anybody because he didn't even believe in demons.Wait a minute. Jesus is accused of casting out demons with demons and Jesus replies that a kingdom cannot stand if Satan casts out Satan. He also equates Satan with Beelzebub. And answer me, who or what is Jesus referring to when he says they are of their father, the devil.
What did Jesus mean when He saw Satan fall from heaven? Why does He also refer Satan as a he and as one entity? What does Jesus mean when He speaks of the devil?
In the OT, any adversary was called a Satan, yes, but in the NT it became known as Jesus' arch adversary, Satan. We truly are playing a game of Semantics here. Satan has many names; Beelzebub, Baphomet, the devil, Lillith, whatever.
Consider Revelations 20:2
He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years.
Revelation 12:9
New International Version (NIV)
9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.
You can't say Zoroastrianism is where Jews got their concept of Satan. Genesis was written way before Zoroastrianism. And Jews did acknowledge evil gods like Moloch and goat gods which is actually Satan if Baphomet is anything to go by. They never attributed them as being God.
Interesting little scenario you made there about Jesus. One problem, the demons themselves didn't play along with that game. They begged for Jesus not to exorcise them and acknowledged Him as the son of God.***************
You are saying "or Satan" but scripture says "and Satan".
He is the Dragon, the serpent, the devil and the opposer, the adversary
Seems you feel very comfortable changing the word to prove your point.
"You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." Deuteronomy 4:2The NIV says the devil or Satan. For heaven's sake, they are just different names for the same entity. Jesus referred to Satan as Satan some of the time, Beelzebub and the devil other times. They are just names!
*******************
Now I know you've lost it.
Crowley never sacrificed anyone much less children and he never advocated it.
Wow, either you listen to other deceived Christians or you make stuff up to prove your point.
You have been wrong about everything you've stated in this thread.From quotes, of Crowley's " MAGICK in Theory and Practice, by The Master Therion":
"But the bloody sacrifice, though more dangerous, is more efficacious; and for nearly all purposes human sacrifice is the best.
The animal should therefore be killed within the Circle, or the Triangle, as the case may be, so that its energy cannot escape. An animal should be selected whose nature accords with that of the ceremony--thus, by sacrifcing a female lamb one would not obtain any appreciate quantity of the fierce energy useful to a Magician who was invoking Mars. In such acase a ram would be more suitable. And this ram should be virgin--the whole potential of its original total energy should not have been diminished in any way. For the highest spiritual working one must accordingly choose that victim which contains the greatest and purest force. A male child of perfect innocence and high intelligence is the most satisfactory and suitable victim."
“Those magicians who object to the use of blood have endeavoured to replace it with incense … But the bloody sacrifice, though more dangerous, is more efficacious; and for nearly all purposes human sacrifice is best.”Crowley used the Kabbalah in his rituals but it is not meant to be used for black magic. But how can you stop someone from desecrating something pure.
He never killed a human.
Crowley was well known, was in the spotlight and couldn’t very well kill and get by with it. That is a myth about him.
His accomplishments
He founded the religious philosophy of Thelema
Later he become a leader of Ordo Templi Orientis
He founded the religious commune in Cefalù known as the Abbey of Thelema,
He wrote “The book of the Law”No, it's not meant for black magic? Whatever.
He never killed a human? Yet, he writes how human sacrifices are needed in black magic. Does that make sense to you? Crowley had the highest degree in Freemasonry. You think the authorities are going to touch him?
You think he's going to call himself "The Beast 666" and not perform sacrifices?
Maybe you should watch this documentary about him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3pJn5xyP2w**********************
People write murder mysteries too, does that mean they are killers?
Get real and stop playing the adversary.That's out of context. He is clearly saying it is necessary to practice black magic, him being a black magician himself.
From his book:
"It is necessary for us to consider carefully the problems connected with the bloody sacrifice, for this question is indeed traditionally important in Magick. Nigh all ancient Magick revolves around this matter."
"This subject must be studied in the "Golden Bough", where it is most learnedly set forth by Dr. J. G. Frazer. Enough has now been said to show that the bloody sacrifice has from time immemorial been the most considered part of Magick."
"However, there is a mystery concealed in this theory of the bloody sacrifice which is of great importance to the student, and we therefore make no further apology, We should not have made even this apology for an apology, had it not been for the solicitude of a pious young friend of great austerity of character who insisted that the part of this chapter which now follows — the part which was originally written — might cause us to be misunderstood. This must not be. The blood is the life."
"It would be unwise to condemn as irrational the practice of those savages who tear the heart and liver from an adversary, and devour them while yet warm. In any case it was the theory of the ancient Magicians, that any living being is a storehouse of energy varying in quantity according to the size and health of the animal, and in quality according to its mental and moral character. At the death of the animal this energy is liberated suddenly."
Nauseating.
Deborah is correct in what she has told you.
I've watched Deborah give long detailed answers to explain her beliefs. I image she doesn't answer you because she's tired of the nonsense.
I know the life she lives and there is no evil within her.I never said that Deborah had even evil in her. Satan comes as an angel of light praying on the naive and good-intentioned. I highly doubt she would participate in the black magic ritual, "The Babalon Working", which requires one to envision the Kabbalah Tree of Life.
I am inclined to believe that this so called 'spiritual satanism' and the associated website are simply reactions to the well documented various inquisitions and suppression of opposing ideas carried out by the Church over the last 1500 years or so. Though burning people at the stake no longer occurs, the culture of opposing free speech, free thought, and unorthodox ideology still persists within the Church, along with superstitious beliefs in demons and some arch fiend aka Satan. The Church is traditionally run by control freaks with the mantra that all go to hell who don't follow it's doctrines, and I do have sympathy with the argument that pagan belief systems were 'demonised' in order to scare the common people away from them ad into the fold of the Church. Nevertheless, the oppressions of the Church do not automatically qualify as evidence of this Satan actually existing.
AngelArs: Do you really believe that the devil will allow himself to be crucified naked? What about the demons who begged Jesus not to cast them out and said Jesus was the son of God? A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand!!
Hell is the complete separation from God. That is why Jesus asked, "Father, why have you forsake me?" To have the whole sin of the world is complete separation from God? Can you imagine what evil can do to you then?Do I really believe that the devil will allow himself to be crucified naked? First of all you’re assuming there was a crucification. I know you weren’t there (if it happened) so at best you are relying on stories that have been handed down through the generations over and over and over again. And of course we all know that man gets these things 100% correct each time he tells them to the next generation, with no biases, or mistranslations along the way. Secondly, sin is a man made concept. One mans ceiling is another mans floor. Since God created everything in the universe then from Gods vantage everything must have a good reason. It’s only man that puts labels on them.
All I know for sure is that God is the source of all love, and that as a mortal man I have free will and a choice. I choose to do good while I am on this planet, to be generous and to help others, and to share as much love as I possibly can. I don’t do these things out of fear for some mystical hell, or because some man made ‘book’ tells me I have to, or for the promise of a heaven, but instead I do them of my own free will because I know in my heart that it is the best way for me to show God my appreciation.Actually, it is universally accepted that Jesus was crucified. Not many doubt that. External sources attest to the crucifixion. For example, Tacitus who was a 1st and 2nd historian who wrote:
"Christus, the founder of the [Christian] name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius. But the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, by through the city of Rome also." Annals XV, 44
Really, God did not create everything in the universe. Everything in life has duality. Satan is definitely not a creation of God despite what the pagan-ripped Genesis says.
Who is your God?Universally accepted huh? Guess what? Just because a lot of people believe something doesn’t mean it’s true. Mass delusion is actually fairly common on this planet when you study it. Another successful historical example of mass delusion was Nazi Germany. Actually it is not universally accepted that ‘jesus’ was crucified. You’re not looking at the facts, just things that support your theories.
FACT: There are no documents written about jesus during his lifetime. None. Zero. Nadda.
FACT: Everything ever said about jesus was also said about other popular ‘hero’ characters like Osiris, Horus and Mithras who proceeded ‘jesus’ by thousands of years.
FACT: Trinities were popular in pagan sects before christianity was introduced to the world. Some of the more well known trinity gods included Mithra-Vohu Mana-Rashnu, Amen-Mut-Khonsu, and Osiris-Isis-Horus.
FACT: Many comparisons exist between ‘jesus’ and Mithras. Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man, both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity. Both had fathers who were a carpenter, both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star, both came onto earth to cleanse the sins of the human beings. Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. Both claimed: "I am the Resurrection.”, Both were supposedly "without sin." Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine. They were both considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead, both selected disciples to spread his teachings, both were supposedly meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners, Both celebrated a last supper with 12 disciples. Both died on the same day, and were resurrected. Supposedly “many people” witnessed their ascensions into heaven. This is just a fraction of their similarities. Some coincidence huh?
In order to fully understand the bible you need to first understand the history of the world at that time. You also need to understand the history of religion, something I can already tell that you haven’t done. Until this happens you will always just be chasing your tail and never learning the full truth. When you’re afraid to face an issue, you will believe the worst of that issue is true.FACT: Jesus was an obscure individual who only really was worth writing about after His resurrection. However, the Talmud does write about Him. Who would have presented the stories of Jesus besides oral tradition at the time of His existence? Would the material have survived?
FACT: I'm not so familiar with the first two god trinities but I'm sure they are similar to Osiris-Isis-Horus. The latter comprised of THREE gods. They were all separate. None of them came is collectively known as one. Remember, there are only two entities, one being human, that comprise of the Holy Spirit. Anyway, the trinity isn't even mentioned in the Bible and Mary is certainly part of the trinity.
MYTH: Everything ever said about jesus was also said about other popular ‘hero’ characters like Osiris, Horus and Mithras who proceeded ‘jesus’ by thousands of years.
Brief points about Osiris and Horus just to get my point across:
Seth murdered him and dismembered his body. His body was reassembled and Isis resuscitated long enough to conceive Horus where he then become Lord of the Underworld.
http://www.ancient-egypt-online.com/osiris.html
Osiris and Isis had sexual intercourse with each other while in their mother’s womb.
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/29r70244#page-4
Nut and Geb, the parents of Osiris were lovers before their children were conceived:
Nut and Geb
Nut and Geb are portrayed as passionate lovers. During the day they are separated by Shu, the god of air. But at night, Nut comes down to make love to Geb. If storms occurred during the day, Egyptians believed Nut had come closer to earth to meet Geb.
Their love angered Nut’s husband, Re, who decreed she could not give birth during the 360 days of the year. Unhappy Nut asked Thoth, the god of wisdom, to help.
Thoth stole some light from the moon to create five new days (making the year 365 days long) on which Nut bore her five children.
http://www.yourdiscovery.com/egypt/gods/nut/index.shtml
HORUS
No virgin birth: "[Isis] made to rise up the helpless members [penis] of him whose heart was at rest, she drew from him his
essence [sperm], and she made therefrom an heir [Horus]
In the Osiris myths she searched for her husband's body, who was killed by her brother Seth. She retrieved and reassembled the body, and in this connection she took on the role of a goddess of the dead and of the funeral rights. Isis impregnated herself from the Osiris' body and gave birth to Horus in the swamps of Khemnis in the Nile Delta
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/i/isis.html
MITHRAS:
David Ulansey
Author of THE ORIGINS OF THE MITHRAIC MYSTERIES
(Oxford University Press, 1991) WRITES:
“Owing to the cult's secrecy, we possess almost no literary evidence about the beliefs of Mithraism. The few texts that do refer to the cult come not from Mithraic devotees themselves, but rather from outsiders such as early Church fathers, who mentioned Mithraism in order to attack it, and Platonic philosophers, who attempted to find support in Mithraic symbolism for their own philosophical ideas. However, although our literary sources for Mithraism are extremely sparse, an abundance of material evidence for the cult exists in the many Mithraic temples and artifacts that archaeologists have found scattered throughout the Roman empire, from England in the north and west to Palestine in the south and east. The temples, called mithraea by scholars, were usually built underground in imitation of caves. These subterranean temples were filled with an extremely elaborate iconography: carved reliefs, statues, and paintings, depicting a variety of enigmatic figures and scenes. This iconography is our primary source of knowledge about Mithraic beliefs, but because we do not have any written accounts of its meaning the ideas that it expresses have proven extraordinarily difficult to decipher.”
So it’s interesting that before Christianity, there was barely any literary evidence of Mithraic beliefs
http://www.well.com/~davidu/mithras.html
Manfred Clauss, German Professor for Ancient History in The Roman Cult of Mithras, writes:
“The literary sources here are few but unmistakable: Mithras was known as the rock-born god. The inscriptions confirm this nomenclature: one even reads D(eo) O(omipotenti) S(oli) Invi(cto), Deo Genitori, r(upe) n(ato), ‘To the almighty God Sun invincible, generative god, born from the rock’….Mithras also appears in the archaeological record as the rock-born god. Many images represent the god growing out of a rock with both arms raised aloft….After the bull-slaying, the rock-birth is the most frequently represented event of the myth, either as a detail on reliefs or, quite commonly, as a free-standing image.” (Clauss, The Roman Cult of Mithras)
Mithras emerged from a rock so no virgin birth.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/mom07.htm
Mithras was never called Savior. Since there were virtually no texts about Mirthras and mostly art depicting him, I strongly suspect that the trinity was made up after Jesus. Unless you have proof otherwise? Wise men and shepherds? No evidence for that. I don’t see evidence of Mithras father that at least predates Christianity and most certainly not a carpenter!! No wise men and shepherds visited him at birth. Unless they knew the exact location of the rock that Mithras was going to spring out from. Lol. Not sure what local dictator wanted him dead. Give a name and sources. Mithras never dies. He was taken to paradise in a chariot- alive and well once his earthly mission was complete. No mention of atonement of sin. No healing of sick or miracles. Mithras has two disciples, Cautes and Cautopates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cautes_and_Cautopates
No Last Supper and resurrection because Mithras never dies. No atonement of sin.
Please check your sources next time. It is clearly you who hasn’t done research into the history of religion.Quote: Jesus was an obscure individual who only really was worth writing about after His resurrection.
Sorry Claire but you need to understand the difference between fact and supposition. Before you can call it a fact you FIRST need to prove that jesus was a REAL person who walked the Earth. Show us documented facts which talk about the seventeen years of Jesus' life between the ages of twelve and twenty-nine which are non-existent. In fact except for the story about “his birth” there is silence about all but the last three years about ‘jesus’. Why didn’t his loyal twelve disciples and his thousands of followers not comment on his life for twenty-nine of his thirty-two years? Weird.
Quote: “the Talmud does write about Him.”
No The majority of scholars agree that it doesn’t. To avoid confusion many of the so-called references were removed from subsequent editions of the Talmud in the 13th century. Sorry but nice try.
Quote: “Brief points about Osiris and Horus just to get my point across”
I think you misunderstood what we wrote. In order to understand better you need to acquire the knowledge of how people in that era lived. Plagiarism was common place and they would take things written in one story, and copy many of the details to write another story. So yes many of the things you mentioned might be true, BUT that does not negate the fact that other details attributed to ‘jesus’ was lifted from these other myths.
In the book “The Jesus Puzzle” it clearly states “Christianity would have many points of similarity to other contemporary religions in the Roman Empire -- particularly Mithraism, who also viewed their founder Mithra as spiritual RATHER THAN as an actual historical human being.”
Many historians and theologians agree that early Christian leaders saw Jesus as the Son of God who was spiritual in nature, and not as a human being. If Jesus had been crucified, then many who saw and heard him preach would still have been alive and could have verified that the gospel was accurate. However this never happened. Logically there could be many good reasons for this. For example; Religious propaganda directed at enemies of the author's religious group. There are Anti-Judaic passages in John which imply that "The Jews" are responsible for Jesus' execution.
Since there are no original copies of the bible in existence, many translations over the centuries have corrupted what might have been originally said. Today many theologians believe that there is little or no accurate information about ‘Jesus’ that has survived to the present time. Bertrand Russell once wrote: "Historically, it is quite doubtful whether Christ ever existed at all, and if He did we do not know anything about Him." Not only was the story of jeses taken from other figures thet came before him, but many aspects of the christianity religion did too. For example, the belief that life continues in some form after death was taken from the Buddist religion. So was the basic rule of behavior which governs how they are to treat others.
Buddist: "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Udana-Varga 5:18
Christian: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Matthew 7:12
The idea of the “virgin mother’ and the ‘holy ghost’ were also taken from the Buddist. In fact the story of ‘jesus’ and Buddha are very similar. For example; Both Jesus and Buddha issued moral commandments that prohibited killing, stealing, adultery, false witness, and coveting. Other things taken from Buddha include:
* Born as an incarnate god.
* Born from a virgin mother.
* Birth claimed as a divine event and prophesied as the same.
* Prodigious childhood.
* Birth attended by singing angels.
* Birth attended by wise men bearing gifts.
* As a child astounded teachers with knowledge.
* Fasted in the wilderness for forty days.
* Resisted the devil successfully.
* After the devil left, supernatural events occurred.
* Tempted while alone by the devil.
* Tempted while alone by the devil.
* Began ministry at thirty years of age.
* Attract large following mostly from lower classes.
* Attracted disciples who traveled with him.
* Attracted one disciple who was treacherous.
* Changed disciples' names.
* Encouraged celibacy for their disciples.
* Consecrated in a holy river.
* Itinerant ministry instead of at a fixed place.
* Performed miracles such as curing blindness.
* Renounced worldly riches and required the same of their disciples.
* Ministered to outcasts.
* Advocated universal love and peace.
* Taught mostly through use of parables.
* Triumphal entries (in Jerusalem and Rajagripa).
* Gave major sermon from a mound.
* Disregarded by the dominant religious elite (Pharisees and Brahmans).
* Just before death dispatched disciples to preach in other areas.
* Death accompanied by supernatural event.
Many statements by Jesus were also taken from Buddha, for example;
JESUS: "A foolish man, which built his house on sand."
BUDDHA: "Perishable is a city built on sand."
JESUS: "Therefore confess your sins one to another, and pray one for another, that you may be healed."
BUDDHA: "Confess before the world the sins you have committed."
JESUS: "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins."
BUDDHA: "Let all sins that were committed in this world fall on me, that the world may be delivered."
JESUS: "Do to others as you would have them do to you."
BUDDHA: "Consider others as yourself."
JESUS: "If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also."
BUDDHA: "If anyone should give you a blow with his hand, with a stick, or with a knife, you should abandon all desires and utter no evil words."
JESUS: "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you."
BUDDHA: "Hatreds do not cease in this world by hating, but by love: this is an eternal truth. Overcome anger by love, overcome evil by good."
JESUS: "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you."
BUDDHA: "Let your thoughts of boundless love pervade the whole world."
JESUS: "Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to cast a stone at her."
BUDDHA: "Do not look at the faults of others or what others have done or not done; observe what you yourself have done and have not done."
JESUS: "You father in heaven makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous."
BUDDHA: "The light of the sun and the moon illuminates the whole world, both him who does well and him who does ill, both him who stands high and him who stands low."
JESUS: "If you wish to be perfect, go sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven."
BUDDHA: "The avaricious do not go to heaven, the foolish do not extol charity. The wise one, however, rejoicing in charity, becomes thereby happy in the beyond."
Are you seeing a pattern here? Because one should have appeared by now. When you study how people in that era lived and that it was common practice back then to take aspects of one story, and insert them into another, it is not hard to see where the “story” of “jesus” came from.First of all, I’d like to ask you how the material that documented Jesus life through 12 to twenty nine, which was not documented on material, could have survived? Who would have written about his childhood extensively? The gospels were written from 30 years after Jesus’ death. Since there was no documentation, who is going to remember what Jesus did as a young boy when He was not known and living an ordinary life? It is testing the memory just a bit much. We do have one thing about Jesus as a child:
43 Luke 2:41-3:0 41And his people went every year to Jerusalem during the feast of the passover. 42And when he was 12 years old, they went up to the feast as they were accustomed. 43And when the feast days were over, they returned; but the boy Jesus remained in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother did not know it.44They thought that he was with the sons of their party; and when they went a day's journey, they sought for him among their own people and those who knew them.45But they could not find him; so they returned again to Jerusalem, looking for him. 46After 3 days, they found him in the temple, sitting in the middle of the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47And all those who heard him were amazed at his wisdom and his answers. 48And when they saw him, they were astonished; and his mother said to him, My son, why have you done this to us? Look, your father and I have been looking for you with great anxiety. 49He said to them, Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I would be in the house of my father? 50But they could not understand the words which he said to them.51So he went down with them and came to Nazareth; and he was subject to them. And his mother treasured all these words in her heart.
52And Jesus grew in his stature and in his wisdom, and in favor with god and men.
I’m not sure if you are aware how historians come to a conclusion if someone existed or not. Here’s an example:
“In 336 B.C. Alexander the Great became king of Macedonia. A military genius, this handsome, arrogant leader swept through villages, towns, and kingdoms of Greco-Persia until he ruled it all. It is said that he cried when there were no more worlds to conquer.
The history of Alexander is drawn from five ancient sources written 300 or more years after he died.[4] Not one eyewitness account of Alexander exists.
However, historians believe Alexander really existed, largely because the accounts of his life are confirmed by archaeology and his impact on history.”
So, do you think that Alexander the Great did not exist because there were no eye witnesses and just 5 measly sources? The first account being written 300 years after his death? Consider that more than 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament exist today in the original Greek language. Many of these manuscripts are merely fragments, while others are virtually complete books. When counting translations into other languages, the number is a staggering 24,000 - dating from the second to the fifteenth century. There’s nothing written about Julius Caesar at the time of his existence.
So is there archaeological evidence regarding what is reported in the Gospels?
In 1961 archaeologists discovered a block of limestone inscribed with the name of “Pontius Pilate prefect of Judea.” And in 1990 archaeologists discovered an ossuary (bone box) with the inscription of Caiaphas. It has been verified as authentic “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
On December 21, 2009, archaeologists announced the discovery of first-century clay shards in Nazareth, confirming that this tiny hamlet existed during the time of Christ.
Also interesting is the fact that world historian Will Durant notes that no Jew or Gentile from the first-century ever denied the existence of Jesus. Roman historians didn’t.
Tacitus (a.d. 55-120), the greatest early Roman historian, wrote that Christus (Greek for Christ) had lived during the reign of Tiberius and “suffered under Pontius Pilate, that Jesus’ teachings had already spread to Rome; and that Christians were considered criminals and tortured in a variety of ways, including crucifixion.”[18]
Suetonius (a.d. 69-130) wrote of “Chrestus” as an instigator. Most scholars believe this is a reference to Christ. Suetonius also wrote of Christians having been persecuted by Nero in a.d. 64.[19]
This particularly is fascinating:
Roman historian Phlegon apparently has also written about a darkness around Jesus' crucifixion
Plegon's writing on history is known as "OLYMPIADES". The reference may be found in "Fragmenta Historicum Graecorum" (C. Muller) 1841- 1870, Volume 3, pages 603 - 624:
"In the 4th year of the 202nd Olympiad, there was a great eclipse [Greek = EKLEIPSIS] of the Sun, greater than had ever been known before, for at the 6th hour the day was changed into night and the stars were seen in the heavens. An earthquake occurred in Bythinia and overthrew a great part of the city of Nicaea"
The first olympiad was held in 776 BC
Each Olympiad is 4 years
The forth year of the 202 Olympiad is 32 AD - around the time that Jesus was crucified.
Julius Africanus' reference to Phlegon:
Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth-manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? Surely no such event as this is recorded for a long period. But it was a darkness induced by God, because the Lord happened then to suffer. And calculation makes out that the period of 70 weeks, as noted in Daniel, is completed at this time.
In: Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1. ( click here )
Pagan chronologer Thallus also tries to explains this away as outlines by Africanus:
A most terrible darkness fell over all the world, the rocks were torn apart by an earthquake, and many places both in Judaea and the rest of the world were thrown down. In the third book of his HISTORIES Thallus dismisses this darkness as a solar eclipse, unreasonably, as it seems to me. For the Hebrews celebrate the PASSOVER on Luna 14, and what happened to the Saviour occurred one day before the PASSOVER. But an eclipse of the sun takes place when the moon passes under the sun. The only time when this can happen is in the interval between the first day of the new moon and the last day of the old moon, when they are in conjunction. How then could one believe an eclipse took place when the moon was almost in opposition to the sun? So be it. Let what had happened beguile the masses, and let this wonderful sign to the world be considered a solar eclipse through an optical [illusion]. Phlegon records that during the reign of Tiberius Caesar there was a complete solar eclipse at full moon from the sixth to the ninth hour; it is clear that this is the one. But what have eclipses to do with an earthquake, rocks breaking apart, resurrection of the dead, and a universal disturbance of this nature
http://www.textexcavation.com/thallustestimonium.html
Historians cite the following evidence for Jesus’ existence:
• Archaeological discoveries continue to verify the Gospel accounts of people and places they record, the latest being Pilate, Caiaphas and the existence of first-century Nazareth.
• Thousands of historical writings document Jesus’ existence. Within 150 years of Jesus’ life 42 authors mention him in their writings, including nine non-Christian sources. During that same time period, only nine secular authors mention Tiberius Caesar; only five sources report the conquests of Julius Caesar. Yet no historian denies their existence.[53]
• Historians, secular and religious, readily acknowledge Jesus Christ has influenced our world more than any other person.
After investigating the Christ-myth theory, the great world historian Will Durant concluded that, unlike the gods of mythology, Jesus was a real person. [54]
Historian Paul Johnson states that all serious scholars acknowledge Jesus as real. [55]
Atheist historian Michael Grant writes, “To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ-myth theory. It has again and again been answered and annihilated by first-rank scholars.”[56]
http://www.y-jesus.com/index.php
No The majority of scholars agree that it doesn’t. To avoid confusion many of the so-called references were removed from subsequent editions of the Talmud in the 13th century. Sorry but nice try.
“FACT: Everything ever said about jesus was also said about other popular ‘hero’ characters like Osiris, Horus and Mithras who proceeded ‘jesus’ by thousands of years.”
This is what you wrote. You claimed that the claims made about Jesus were also claimed about Osiris and Horus and Mithras. I understood this perfectly well…
“BUT that does not negate the fact that other details attributed to ‘jesus’ was lifted from these other myths.”
Really? Like Mithras? Are you telling the lies you posted about Mithras is fact when I proved otherwise? Nice try.
“In the book “The Jesus Puzzle” it clearly states “Christianity would have many points of similarity to other contemporary religions in the Roman Empire -- particularly Mithraism, who also viewed their founder Mithra as spiritual RATHER THAN as an actual historical human being.”
This means nothing. At the most, Mithras took on Chrisitian characteristics not the other way round.
“Many historians and theologians agree that early Christian leaders saw Jesus as the Son of God who was spiritual in nature, and not as a human being. If Jesus had been crucified, then many who saw and heard him preach would still have been alive and could have verified that the gospel was accurate.”
Who said that didn’t happen? If we get Roman historians attesting to it, then I’m sure eye-witnesses would. In fact, I would have expected many Jewish writings to have refuted the claims of crucifixion since Christianity is not in their favour. No one ever claimed that the eye-witnesses were lying.
“There are Anti-Judaic passages in John which imply that "The Jews" are responsible for Jesus' execution”
The Jewish priests and leaders who were threatened by Jesus wanted Him dead and His enemies. Many Jews mourned the death of Jesus.
“Bertrand Russell once wrote: "Historically, it is quite doubtful whether Christ ever existed at all, and if He did we do not know anything about Him."
Lol
Buddist: "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Udana-Varga 5:18
Christian: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Matthew 7:12
Wow, that truly does prove Jesus didn’t exist!
“Both Jesus and Buddha issued moral commandments that prohibited killing, stealing, adultery, false witness, and coveting”
Didn’t Moses as well? This is completely asinine.
Lies about Buddha: I’m just going to mention a few because of time constraints. I can’t write a book.
Not born of a virgin.
. The birth of the Bodhisattva
There lived once upon a time a king of the Shakyas, a scion of the solar race, whose name was Shuddhodana. He was pure in conduct, and beloved.of the Shakyas like the autumn moon. He had a wife, splendid, beautiful, and steadfast, who was called the Great Maya, from her resemblance to Maya the Goddess. These two tasted of love's delights, and one day she conceived the fruit of her womb, but without any defilement, in the same way in which knowledge joined to trance bears fruit. Just before her conception she had a dream. A white king elephant seemed to enter her body, but without causing her any pain. So Maya, queen of that god-like king, bore in her womb the glory of his dynasty
As was the custom of the day, when the time came near for Queen Mahamaya to have her child, she traveled to her father's kingdom for the birth. But during the long journey, her birth pains began. In the small town of Lumbini, she asked her handmaidens to assist her to a nearby grove of trees for privacy. One large tree lowered a branch to her to serve as a support for her delivery. They say the birth was nearly painless, even though the child had to be delivered from her side. After, a gentle rain fell on the mother and the child to cleanse them.
It is said that the child was born fully awake. He could speak, and told his mother he had come to free all mankind from suffering. He could stand, and he walked a short distance in each of the four directions. Lotus blossoms rose in his footsteps. They named him Siddhartha, which means "he who has attained his goals." Sadly, Mahamaya died only seven days after the birth. After that Siddhartha was raised by his mother’s kind sister, Mahaprajapati.
No angels and no wise men.
http://www.buddhastatues.org/siddhartha … statue.htm
What supernatural event took place when he died? This is what happened:
Growing weaker, he spoke one last time: "Do not say we have no master now. The doctrine I have preached will be your master when I have disappeared. Listen, I beg you: ALL CREATIONS ARE IMPERMANENT; work diligently for your liberation."
Having pronounced these final words, Buddha went into the jhana stages, or meditative absorptions. Going from level to level, one after the other, ever deeper and deeper, he reached ecstacy. Then he came out of the meditative absorption for the last time and passed into nirvana, leaving nothing whatever behind that can cause rebirth again in this or any other world.and finally passed into Nirvana.
Not God incarnate:
The Buddha was a unique human being who was self-Enlightened. He had no one whom He could regard as His teacher. Through His own efforts, He practised to perfection the ten supreme qualities of generosity, discipline, renunciation, wisdom, energy, endurance, truthfulness, determination, goodwill and equanimity. Through His mental purification, He opened the doors to all knowledge. He knew all things to be known, cultivated all things to be cultivated, and destroyed all things to be destroyed. Indeed, no other religious teacher was comparable to Him in terms of cultivation and attainment.
So special was He and so electrifying His message, that many people asked Him 'What(not so much as Who) He was'. Questions on 'Who He was' would be with respect to His name, origin, ancestry, etc., while 'What He was' referred to the order of beings to which He belonged. So 'godly and inspiring was He that even during His time, there were numerous attempts of others to turn Him into a god or a reincarnation of god. Never did He agree to be regarded as such. In the Anguttara Nikaya, He said: 'I am not indeed a deva, nor a gandharva, nor a yaksa, nor a manusya. Know ye that I am the Buddha.' After Enlightenment, the Buddha could no longer be classified even as a 'manusya' or an ordinary human being. He belonged to the Buddha Wangsa, special race or species of enlightened beings, all of whom are Buddhas.
Buddhas appear in this world from time to time. But some people have the mistaken idea that it is the same Buddha who is reincarnated or appears in the world over and over again. Actually, they are not the same person, otherwise there is no scope for others to attain Buddhahood. Buddhists believe that anyone can become a Buddha if he develops his qualities to perfection and is able to remove his ignorance completely through his own efforts. After Enlightenment, all Buddhas are similar in their attainment and experience of Nibbana.
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/12.htm
Did not begin ministry at 30. He died at 80 and taught for 45 years.
Therefore, he was 35.
He did not teach as a child. He lived in absolute luxury until his early adulthood.
The king, eager that his son should become a king like himself, was determined to shield the child from anything that might result in him taking up the religious life. And so Siddhartha was kept in one or another of their three palaces, and was prevented from experiencing much of what ordinary folk might consider quite commonplace. He was not permitted to see the elderly, the sickly, the dead, or anyone who had dedicated themselves to spiritual practices. Only beauty and health surrounded Siddhartha.
Siddhartha Gautama Buddha grew up to be a strong and handsome young man. As a prince of the warrior caste, he trained in the arts of war. When it came time for him to marry, he won the hand of a beautiful princess of a neighboring kingdom by besting all competitors at a variety of sports. Yashodhara was her name, and they married when both were 16 years old.
As Siddhartha Gautama Buddha continued living in the luxury of his palaces, he grew increasing restless and curious about the world beyond the palace walls. He finally demanded that he be permitted to see his people and his lands. The king carefully arranged that Siddhartha should still not see the kind of suffering that he feared would lead him to a religious life, and decried that only young and healthy people should greet the prince.
Don’t know where you got the major sermon on the mound from.
lthough initially hesitant to share his insight on the grounds that humanity might not be ready for such a teaching, the Buddha decided to communicate his discovery to those willing to listen. His first converts were the five ascetics with whom he had lived when he himself followed the lifestyle of the ascetic. To these he preached his first sermon in the Deer Park at Benares, outlining to them the Four Noble Truths. Out of this small group the community of monks (orSangha) grew to about 60 in size and came to include Buddha's cousin, Ananda, and his son, Rahula. Later the Buddha was persuaded by his stepmother and cousin to accept women into the sangha
No supernatural event occurred afterwards, though.
Buddha did perform miracles.
Buddha was tempted by Mara and resisted:
On the full moon of May, with the rising of the morning star, Siddhartha finally understood the answer to the question of suffering and became the Buddha, which means “he who is awake.”
It is said that Mara, the evil one, tried to prevent this great occurrence. He first tried to frighten Siddhartha Gautama Buddha with storms and armies of demons. Siddhartha remained completely calm. Then he sent his three beautiful daughters to tempt him, again to no avail. Finally, he tried to ensnare Siddhartha Gautama Buddha in his own ego by appealing to his pride. That, too, failed. Siddhartha Gautama Buddha , having conquered all temptations, touched the ground with one hand and asked the earth to be his witness.
Mara, however, was a demon and not Satan himself. However, the gist is similar..
Buddha fasted 49 days under the Bodhi Tree.
Disciples:
The number of Buddha's followers gradually increased. Nobles, Brahmins and many wealthy men became his disciples. Buddha paid no attention to caste. The poor and the outcastes were admitted to his order. Those who wanted to become full members of his order were obliged to become monks and to observe strict rules of conduct. Buddha had many lay disciples also. Those lay members had to provide for the wants of the monks.
In the forest of Uruvila, there were three brothers - all very famous monks and philosophers. They had many learned disciples. They were honoured by kings and potentates. Lord Buddha went to Uruvila and lived with those three monks. He converted those three reputed monks, which caused a great sensation all over the country.
Lord Buddha and his disciples walked on towards Rajgriha, the capital of Magadha. Bimbisara, the king, who was attended upon by 120,000 Brahmins and householders, welcomed Buddha and his followers with great devotion. He heard the sermon of Lord Buddha and at once became his disciple. 110,000 of the Brahmins and householders became full members of Lord Buddha's order and the remaining 10,000 became lay adherents. Buddha's followers were treated with contempt when they went to beg their daily food. Bimbisara made Buddha a present of Veluvanam - a bamboo-grove, one of the royal pleasure-gardens near his capital. Lord Buddha spent many rainy seasons there with his followers.
There weren’t significantly more poor than rich and vice versa. The followers had to become monks, which obvious Jesus did not require of His disciples.
There was no triumphant entry into Rajagripa. He came there after renouncing his luxurious life seeking salvation.
http://www.shambhalatrekking.com/pilgri … griha.html
Interesting that…he sought salvation and never offered it.
He was not disregarded by the Brahmins. They become his disciples.
These are just some of the points I’ve touched on. While there are some similarities, which doesn’t surprise me as there were many teachers who performed miracles, the differences are more significant and when taken into context, just does not align with Jesus significantly.
ESUS: "Therefore confess your sins one to another, and pray one for another, that you may be healed."
BUDDHA: "Confess before the world the sins you have committed."
I have looked this up and see you’ve got this quotes from one source. Do you have others? This is what I found.
The Buddha said, "If a man who has committed many sins, does not repent and purify his heart of evil, retribution will come upon his person as sure as the streams runs into the ocean which becomes ever deeper and wider. If a man who has committed sins, come to the knowledge of it, reforms himself, and practises goodness, the force of retribution will gradually exhaust itself as a disease gradually loses its baneful influence when the patient perspires."
I don’t see confess before the world or that they should pray for one another. In Christianity, it is just not true that retribution shall fall upon all those who do wrong. Look at the injustice of the world. Jesus said that retribution will come from God on Judgement Day and not on this earth.
JESUS: "If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also."
BUDDHA: "If anyone should give you a blow with his hand, with a stick, or with a knife, you should abandon all desires and utter no evil words."
What I found: 6. The Buddha said, "When an evil-man, seeing you practise goodness, comes and maticiously insults you, you should patiently endure it and not feel angry with him, for the evil-man is insulting himself by trying to insult you."
I don’t know where your quotes form but they seem to have been manipulated to sound more like Jesus.
JESUS: "You father in heaven makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous."
I don’t’ remember this. Can you give me the chapter and the verse?
JESUS: "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins."
BUDDHA: "Let all sins that were committed in this world fall on me, that the world may be delivered."
Buddha NEVER claimed to be the redeemer of sin and a saviour. Provide proof of that, please.
I’m just wondering how the gospel writers were so learned in Buddhism, should your theory that Jesus is just another version of Buddha be true. Did they have possession of the texts? How did they know of all these sayings?
To summarize, there were many proclaimed messiahs and those with divinity. Yes, there were people with divine powers. Magicians have that sort of power. In fact, Jesus was accused of driving out demons with magic that is driving demons out with demons. Buddha never claimed to be incarnate of God. Jesus claimed to be the son of God and rose from the dead.
The truth of the matter is that the most important aspects of Christianity are not compatible with Buddhism. Your argument does not hold water because many of the things you’ve claimed about Buddha is just false or is a half truth.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Anyone who truly understands Jewish Mysticism, and that the 32 paths of wisdom is based on Genesis, would not call it evil.
Well, true understanding of Mysticism means that one doesn't have a true understanding of Genesis. You don't believe that Elohims can from another world? Or that humans were genetically modified? The literal translation of Genesis says all that.
Have you found the secrets of the universe yet? Apparently that is what the study of Kabbalism is about, no? Do you think you are on the way to godhood? Is that not blasphemy?*********************************
************************
God said there is none other beside him. When you worship anyone besides him, it is idolatry.
I read the Hebrew Bible in Hebrew. It is not corrupted.
I only use the English Bible when I am speaking to Christians.
There is much Numerology in the Bible.
During Bible days, there were no numbers like we have today.
The alphabet was used for numbers.
But there is also Numerology in the New Testament.
Why do you think you see the same numbers over and over? Why do you think in the O.T. and N.T. the number 40 is used when s person,/people go through something tough?
Everything in the world has a mathematical formula
Why is it you think numbers are evil. I believe you are way too superstitious and afraid. Why don’t you trust God?
________________________
If anything exists, then its source of existence can be logically tracked down. If its source can be tracked down, it can be mathematically explained. From
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?EveryThingIsMathJesus said He was God. Does God in the OT condemn occult practices?
Okay, see when it says Solomon has 666 talents, what does that mean?
Numerology is very important in the occult.
I trust God but you are being led astray be Satan.
**********************
Genesis in Hebrew is Bereshit and means the beginning. Not that junk you are saying. You have no Idea how Mysticism is based on Genesis. Your statements are not only incorrect, they are also ridiculous
Run along and worship your idols.Deborah, do you know anything about the literal translation of Genesis?
That's a serious question. Please answer it. Also answer me what Solon's 666 talents mean? You're starting to remind me of ATM. I thought you had some interesting things to say when I first came across you here. Now you just say, "Lies, Lol, etc", without offering any rebuttal.
Deborah,
I know that you know Genesis very well; can you please tell me why “The Cabalists say that the soul of Esau, whom the Arabs call Ais, passed into the body of Jesus Christ by metempsychosis, and that Jesus and Esau are one.”
Who was this man – Esau, what Cabalists know about him?There are many different Kabbalist, Spanish, German, Hebrew, etc. Each has his own way of expressing mysteries.
I am sure they are saying Esau reincarnated into Jesus.
We Jews have always believed in reincarnation, and you can clearly see it even in the English Bible.
It was prophesied that Elijah (himself) would return just before the Messiah.
Jesus said that John the Baptist was Elijah.
I'm not Deborah, but I am as close as you can get to her.Interesting that because John 1:19-21 says:
19 Now this was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders[a] in Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was. 20 He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, “I am not the Messiah.”
21 They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?”
He said, “I am not.”
“Are you the Prophet?”
He answered, “No.”
Therefore, Elijah was the spirit of John the Baptist for prophecy to be fulfilled. It doesn't mean he is a reincarnation of him. Luke 1:13-17 alludes to this:
13But the angel said to him, Do not be afraid, Zachariah, because your petition [a]was heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you must call his name John [God is favorable].
14And you shall have joy and exultant delight, and many will rejoice over his birth,
15For he will be great and distinguished in the sight of the Lord. And he must drink no wine nor strong drink, and he will be filled with and controlled by the Holy Spirit even [b]in and from his mother's womb.
16And he will turn back and cause to return many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their God,
17And he will [himself] go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn back the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient and incredulous and unpersuadable to the wisdom of the upright [which is [c]the knowledge and holy love of the will of God]--in order to make ready for the Lord a people [perfectly] prepared [in spirit, [d]adjusted and disposed and placed in the right moral state].*******************
Wrong again, it is very rare for anyone to remember their past lives. This is why John said no.
It was not the spirit as in attitude etc.
Malachi 4:5
Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Yahshua told them it was Elijah.
Here I thought you believed Yahshua
You can’t read one sentence and think you have the interpretation of the whole Bible
Matt 11
12And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
13For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
14And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
15He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Matt. 17
10And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.Oh, so Jesus never thought to tell John the Baptist that he was Elijah? What about John's own father who was supposed to have told John he was Elijah?There are some who supposedly remember their past lives but they are always kings and queens and never paupers. Lol
Malachi 4:5-6 says God would send Elijah. However, when John the Baptist is asked who he was, he quoted Isaiah 40:3, which goes:
"The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the Lord; Make straight in the desert A highway for our God"
Malachi 3:1 parallels this. And Mark 1:2-3 as well:
As it is written in the Prophets: “Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, Who will prepare Your way before You.” 3 “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord; Make His paths straight.’”
So, I think John denied being Elijah to avoid being told he was Elijah resurrected, which the Jews anticipated. When Jesus said John was Elijah, He meant that John had come to fulfil the same purpose Elijah did and that was to cause Israel to repent.
http://www.equip.org/articles/was-john- … st-elijah-
****************************
Joel is Hebrew and was born in Israel. He is a Rabbe, and you think you know more about the Hebrew Bible than he?obviously
did Jesus know more about the scriptures than the rabbis?
did Jesus know more about the scriptures than the Jews?
Did the commoner Jew know so very much about Gods laws and the way God wanted them interpreted?
just because rabbi is stuck after the name is not a case for empirical correctness, in fact, far from it.
************************************
The verse in Luke 1 gives a perfect definition of reincarnation: the return of a person's spirit and power into another body. It is the spirit and power that reincarnates. Therefore this verse clearly states that John the Baptist had the spirit and power of Elijah. And this is exactly what reincarnation means. It does not get much clearer than this.
Although John carried the living spirit of Elijah he did not carry his conscious mind and memory. Reincarnation involves only the higher consciousness of the spirit.
Because John did not have the conscious mind and past-life memories of Elijah, John denied being Elijah. With very few exceptions, nobody has a conscious memory of past lives. The following is the Bible passage that shows John denying that he is Elijah.Why did Elijah's father not tell him he was Elijah reincarnated according to the Malachi prophecy?
I don't think spirit and power of Elijah is a literal thing. You know, in the context like, "they did it in the spirit of goodwill", for example. Having the "spirit' of Elijah means having the same purpose as Elijah did, which was to cause Israel to repent.
It's obvious that one needs to die for one's spirit to be reincarnated into another body. However, Elijah never died. He was whisked away on a chariot with flames and went to heaven. That is why the Jews expected him to come again in the same flesh and that is why John the Baptist denied he was Elijah.
It was prophesied that Elijah (himself) would return just before the Messiah.
If a person comes back as the same person this is not a reincarnation it is a resurrection.
Get your own doctrine straight before you start to deceive others
If the person is reborn, this event is called reincarnation.
Esau was reincarnated as Christ, in fact Christ's mother tong was Galillean-Aramac and in Aramaic, Christ's name is Isa. Isa is also Aramaic name for Esau, the first born son of Isaac.
So, Esau was reincarnated and even given the same name; however, He again has been slaughter by the Jews.
The next time, the Jews will see Him being resurrected, not reincarnated, and will have no doubt Who is Who.I will try to be patient with you because I know you are new to God, but it is time to learn. If you are of God you will try to stop trying to provoke people.
Reincarnation is not my doctrine, it is God’s truth. All of the people in scripture, except the Sadducees accepted reincarnation as a true and natural event.
A Resurrection means you go into eternal life and there are only 2, the first and second resurrections.
Although John, like most people, did not remember his past life as Elijah, Yahshua told the disciples that John the baptist is indeed..Elijah that was to come.
Matthew 11:13-15
13. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
14. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
15. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
We are always the same person with different lives/names. This is so we can learn particular lessons and overcome. We may reincarnate to reap karma. (Reap what you sow)
Matthew 17:10
The disciples asked him, “Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”
Yahshua answered them by saying, Elijah already came..as John the Baptist.
Matthew 17:12
But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”
Mark 9:11
And they asked him, “Why do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”
Mark 9:13
But I tell you, Elijah has come, and they have done to him everything they wished, just as it is written about him.
************************
No it is not about the Universe. It is about a person and God.
Yahshua said for us to be one with God.
Godhood? no but you have to admit that according to the New Testament, Yahshua said we are all little Gods and we were made in God's image.
I thought you believed in Yahshua (Jesus to you)
Do you or don't you?
What do you do to draw closer to God? Anything?
And BTW, Yahshua did keep things secret.We are made in our image. Is that a possibility? We have an image of ourselve's, to some degree. I would think it fair to assume that God is an aspect of the self and all things in nature. Atomic structures are God and all gram negative ellements are God. God is the interconnectedness of all things. Is that possible, even in the farthest reaches of an idea?
NO. I believe is was totally separate and saying different says that he was crazy because he specifically said "the father is greater than I am" and he prayed to HIM and gave us the example of how to pray to him.
all what wanna say here is in my poem few lines ,
who host this trial ?,why images fail to lead ?
confession stage liers, no one heard my plead
confined with desires,buried my faded cry.
even worship fears but didn't feed the sky- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Jewish Mysticism is not a religion, it is a way of life. It did not come from Babylon.
Jewish Mystics are people with soul’s craving for communion with the Divine.
As Yahshua said “we are to become one with each other as Yahshua and The Father are one. After we have achieved that, we can be one with both Yahshua and the Father”
John 17:21-23
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23. I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
Mysticism strives for, craves for this, and we are called Satanist by the unlearned and the fools
What people call magic is not magic. We manifest what we need and want because we seek the righteousness of God. Miracles just happen.
Yahshua said
Matthew 6:33
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
And that’s what Mysticism does.
When another religion tried to destroy Judaism It corrected the balance. It showed that Judaism was a religion of the feelings as well as of the intellect.
It showed that the Jew's eternal quest was not to be right with Aristotle but to be right with God.
It showed that Judaism has a place not only for Reason but for Love too.
It showed that the ideal life of the Jew was, not a life of outward harmony with rules and prescriptions, but a life of inward attachment to a Divine Life which is immanent everywhere, and that the crown and consummation of all effort consists in finding a direct way to the actual presence of God.Didn't Jesus say the only way to the Father is through Him? Did He say that the occult is the only way to the Father? You can only know God through Jesus!
So you think that everyone is an extension of God? If God is to be worshiped, isn't that self idolatry?
This is what comes from a Kabbalah site:
“Receiving,” as in receiving the truth of what is happening right now. The truth is, you are God reading about God, in the process of God becoming God. But chances are you don’t “receive” that truth fully, because of how your mind, body, and heart work. The forms of Kabbalah can help you really receive the truth of this moment.
It is blasphemy to say one is God.
One of the most important Kabbalists, Rabbi Moshe Cordovero, as translated by scholar Daniel Matt said this:
The essence of divinity is found in every single thing — nothing but it exists.... Do not attribute duality to God. Let God be solely God. If you suppose that Ein Sof emanates until a certain point, and that from that point on is outside of it, you have dualized. God forbid! Realize, rather, that Ein Sof exists in each existent. Do not say, “This is a stone and not God.” God forbid! Rather, all existence is God, and the stone is a thing pervaded by divinity.
I thought you attributed dualism to God??
Mysticism does come from Babylon. Kabbalah is theosophical and the founder of the theosophy movement is Helena Blavatsky who said:
The hidden wisdom of the Hebrew Rabbis of the middle ages derived from the older secret doctrines concerning divine things and cosmogony, which were combined into a theology after the time of the captivity of the Jews in Babylon. All that fall under the esoteric category are termed Kabalistic.” (Blavatsky, Theosophical Glossary, p. 168)
You actually don't seem to know much about Kabbalah.******************
Bla Bla Bla
I've never said this to anyone before, but you are a very strange person.No rebuttal, of course. I'm just someone parroting what Kabbalah is all about. That's why I am sounding strange.
*********
When did I say we are an extension of God?***************************************
Joel and I are Hasidic Jews. We are Jewish Mystics.
That Helen did not discover Kabbalah. Kabbalah is the Western world's take on Jewish Mysticism. Kabbalah does not agree in all things with Jewish Mysticism.
Kabbalah Meaning-the ancient Jewish tradition of mystical interpretation of the Bible, first transmitted orally and using esoteric methods (including ciphers). It reached the height of its influence in the later Middle Ages and remains significant in Hasidism.
I know enough about it to teach it, and I do.
You can't copy someone else's opinion and say, this is the truth and since you don't agree, you don't know anything about it.
You're not showing God's love. Why Not?
CORDOVERA is not important to me. He is Latino and goes by the Spanish Kabbalah. Quite different from Jewish Mysticism. That's like saying because the Catholics are Christian, that you believe in pergatory.
One of the most important for the Jews is Isaac Luria, a Jewish mystic in Safed
Why do you think you know everything, just because you look it up?Give me a recap about what you believe in Kabbalah.
What do you mean I'm not showing God's love? Because I disagree with you? You are the one who is making snide comments just laughing at me the whole time. That's not showing God's love.**************************
I've written four Hubs..Read them.
No, there's no love in you.
I am laughing at the ridiculous. Putting other people's words here to prove I believe what they say.
I've seen you laugh just to laugh at others yourself, just to be condescendingAnd I suppose you are oozing with love yourself, Deborah?
You pick and choose which points and questions I have presented to you which makes me think that you don't know the insidious and sometimes obvious nature of Kabbalah.
I know how I have laughed at and that is ATM because he just posted lies about Zoroastrianism, which were just plain ridiculous.
I will read your hubs. In the meantime, I just want to bring to your attention to something.
First of all, Kabbalah is completely contrary to what Jesus taught. Kabbalists think that with knowledge and magic, they can be united with God and know the secrets of the universe. Ancient Kabbalists used ancient techniques that made them fall into a trance. Legend says that some who aren't "pure" enough or not learned enough actually go mad or suffer death because God deems them not worthy enough. The Babalon Working black magic practice does this.
So my question to you is, do you want to worship a God who can made people go made or die because they are not worthy or not? Did not Jesus the only way to the Father was through Him and not through spells and trances?
I learnt this information from a documentary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVZlwY5e … re=related*********************************
Dear Claire...as I said before....
What people call magic is not magic. We manifest what we need and want because we seek the righteousness of God. Miracles just happen.
Yahshua said
Matthew 6:33
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
And that’s what Mysticism does.
Yahshua said those of God would have signs that follow.
What are the Godly signs that follow you?
It was hidden because of love and wanting it to be sought by a sincere person..someone who really wants to know God.
Don't you believe in answers to prayer and miracles?
You read all those non-mystic sites and believe what they say. Then you think you know all about Kabbalah. It's very deep and takes years to learn.
That's why it was kept secret..because if someone unlearned practiced it they could cause themselves problems. Because in mysticism you get what you pray for.No, Kabbalists want to know the the mind of God and all His secrets. Miracles happens when someone is not trying to know the mind of God. Going into a trance and doing spells is most certainly not a miracle. It's an occult practice.
Jesus encompasses the kingdom of God. Seek Him and you have sought God. Jesus did not say seek the mind of God.
I have had so many manifestations of God's love but they cannot be imparted to those on the Internet. Miracles don't always occur in the form of miraculous visual wonders.
You keep it secret? That just proves it's an occult practice. And those problems that can be caused? Yes, insanity and death. Nice God. I mean, Satan. I watched a documentary on Aleister Crowley and to black magicians, there are certain spells that cannot be performed because they can make one mad. Sounds familiar...Crowley performed it and did eventually go mad.
As for you saying there are no spells, I think I recall you did, and magic involved, let me tell you what I have consulted.
Remember you referred me to a rabbi? Well, I did the same thing. Here is his background:
"Rabbi David Azulai, the great-grandson of the illustrious Rabbi Yosef Abraham Azulai, was born in Fez, Morocco in 1958. Rabbi David Azulai is the scion of a family of great “Talmidei Chachamim” (Torah Scholars) and “Ba’alei Mofes” (individuals who have the ability through prayer of performing miracles).As a youth, Rabbi David Azulai studied under great Sephardi sages such as the Ben Ish Chai and Kabbalist Rabbi Yehuda Elizur."
Now let's see what he says about Kabbalah:
"Kabbalah is an aspect of Jewish mysticism. It consists of a large body of speculation on the nature of divinity, the creation, the origin and fate of the soul, and the role of human beings. It consists also of meditative, devotional, mystical and magical practices which were taught only to a select few and for this reason Kabbalah is regarded as an esoteric offshoot of Judaism.
The word Kabbalah designates the mysteries of the Jewish mystic tradition. The kabbalah is both theoretical philosophy and a practice close to that of meditation."
Did he say magic?
http://www.kabalatalisman.com/kabbala-information/
I'll go to another page because I can sense a, "Oh, it's only someone's opinion" claim again.
"The ultimate goal in Kabbalah, as in all doctrines of Spirituality is Self-Actualization and connection to the Supreme Being. The path to ascension in most spirituality movements is identical to that conceived by the Jewish Mystics - union with the Godhead. New Age Spiritualism and Ritual Magic sees “the divine” as Light, Love, and. Spirit. It is a spark in all things. A living and omnipresent force, sustaining all energies from the tinniest quantum particle to the vastness of the Universe itself.
Through magical ritual the follower of Kabbalah invokes these spirits and mingles his own life energy with theirs. Each such “bonding” bringing him closer to the Ultimate Spirit - The All, The Almighty, The Is, or God. With each ascension his spiritual perceptions become more acute, with his consciousness more accustomed to the divine force flowing through him, and thus becomes prepared to “take it to the next level”
With each spiritual evolution the Cabalist then invokes the Spirit of the Sephirah or plane immediately above him, and so on, until finally he transcends. Standing upon the profound peak of spiritual realization, united with the infinite."
http://www.astralmagick.com/spiritual-c … balah.html
I'm sorry, but magic is involved in Kabbalah. To add, why is this information from these Kabbalists mere opinion but yours is not?- Sorry Claire, but your "manifestations and miracles" are indistinguishable from the same magic you refute.
So you are back I see. I was about to call the police.
Whatever you do, don't call the thought police, they'll have you arrested on multiple charges.
For what? Lying? Aren't you guilty of that, too?
********************************
Here you go Claire I can do the same thing that you're doing. Need More?
It doesn't same you know much about your religion Claire.
Anti-Christ
The Anti-Christ is the Christian Church
http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_3.html (Good Reading)
Christianity is the AntiChrist Religion, page 1
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread183588/pg1
Parallels between the Christian gospels and Pagan mythology
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa1.htm
Pagan symbols adopted by Christianity
http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/pagan-symbols.html
Pagan Christian Holidays
http://godkind.org/pagan-holidays.html
Christians are pagans and pagans are christians
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oELT0LybbXM
Why don't pagans see that Christians are more dangerous to them ...
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index … 048AAs8oxq
And Many More
https://www.google.com/search?q=https%3 … mp;bih=866DIfferentiate between the Vatican and how they corrupted the religion.
I do not see how following Jesus Christ and accepting Him as their saviour could be Anti-Christ especially since it means opposed to Christ. Lol.
3rd link
Many early Christians celebrated Jesus' birthday on JAN-6. Armenian Christians still do. In Alexandria, in what is now Egypt, the birthday of their god-man, Aion, was also celebrated on JAN-6.
Christians and most Pagans eventually celebrated the birthday of their god-man on DEC-25.
It matters not when Christians influenced by paganism celebrated his birth. Everyone should know that and 25th December is not the date either. What is relevant is what the gospels said about the date of his birth and there was none. Shepherds tend to their sheep in the spring.
"At Pentecost, the followers of Jesus were recorded as speaking in tongues. At Trophonius and Delos, the Pagan priestesses also spoke in tongues: They appeared to speak in such a way that each person present heard her words in the observer's own language."
How is this relevant? The devil can also make people speak in tongues.
An inscription to Mithras reads: "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."
This is so incredibly dishonest. NO sources on Mithraism, which was mainly through artwork, ever claimed he said this. This is from Christianity.
http://www.well.com/~davidu/mithras.html
And so forth…
4th link and 5th
As illustrated above, it doesn’t matter that pagan symbols and rituals were adopted into Christianity. I’m concerned about what was written in the gospels.
Don't hate Deborah because she's so beautiful.
Not everyone has it allThat's a very childish thing to say. I do not hate Deborah. Criticizing someone's practice and just telling the truth about someone or something is not hate. I'm actually concerned about her.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Philo writes of the Mystica, that they were "eminently worshippers of God (θεραπευταὶ θεοῦ), not in the sense that they sacrifice living animals (like the priests in the Temple), but that they are anxious to keep their minds in a priestly state of holiness. They prefer to live in villages, and avoid cities on account of the habitual wickedness of those who in-habit them, knowing, as they do, that just as foul air breeds disease, so there is danger of contracting an incurable disease of the soul from such bad associations."
Again, in another of his works (De Vita contemplativa, ed. Conybeare, 206), Philo says: . . they study only that which pertains to the existence of God and the beginning of all things, otherwise they devote all their attention to ethics, using as instructors the laws of their fathers, which, without the outpouring of the Divine Spirit, the human mind could not have devised . . . for, following their ancient traditions, they obtain their philosophy by means of allegorical interpretations. . . . Of the love of God they exhibit myriads of examples, inasmuch as they strive for a continued uninterrupted life of purity and holiness; they avoid swearing and falsehood, and they declare that God causes only good and no evil whatsoever. . .
No one possesses a house absolutely as his own, one which does not at the same time belong to all; for, in addition to living together in companies, their houses are open also to their adherents coming from other quarters. They have one storehouse for all, and the same diet; their garments belong to all in common, and their meals are taken in common."
ALL TRUE - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
The Kabbalist's Definition of the Snake- Nachash (שחנ)
The word according to the secret tradition designates the deep interior feeling binding an entity to its own individual existence, making it ardently desire to preserve and enlarge it.
Nachash, the snake within man is the radical egotism which causes an individual being to make of itself a center and to relate everything else to it. Moses defines this sentiment as the seducing passion of elementary nature and the secret spring with which the Creator has provided all (animate) things in nature; we know it by the name of natural instinct. Nachash is not to be understood as a separate being, but rather as a central movement given to matter, a hidden spring acting in the depths of things.
The self-seeking elements within man, the blind passions common to us all in our early stages of evolution are the offspring of this snake—Nachash. This word stands
All love emotions are expansive, all emotions of hatred are restrictive.
Hope and faith are of the nature of love and expand the soul, while fear and doubt and despair are of the nature of hate and contract our souls, making us feel uneasy, and unhappy. The snake stands for contraction, for tightness and indrawing; while men fight and quarrel with one another they always resemble more or less the old snake, each drawing to its side, anxious for self-preservation. Freedom from the snake's anguish can only be had by ceasing from the snake's ways, and learning to obey the law of love, the first dictate of which is self-sacrifice. MMMMMMM it depends what religion you follow , The saying "Jesus IS LORD" is bantered arount quite loosley and the Lord is God so what ever you beleive is what you believe , My belief is that there is only one truth regarding Jesus-God but none of us have got the full answers , Now imagine that truth being a big mirror , The truth about relgion is so complex that god beleived thatn it would burn us out so in order to protect us he broke the mirror leaving millions of tiny peices of truth scattered everywhere , Profits found peices of the mirror which was the truth but unfortunatly made a flying guess at what other parts of the mirror told , this is why we have so many religions , so many fight and so much uncertainty , no one really knows
Im new so please excuse my un-post like attitude , don't mean to offend
Okay i like just wrote a hub on this, so if you want u can check out my hub, De Trinity. But the way i see it is that eacgh paart is part of a fraction. The Father is 1/3, the Son is 2/3, and the Holy Spirt finishes off the ensemble as 3/3 of the fraction. All are crucial in God's big plan. If you still don't get it after reading my hub, let meh know and maybe i can ask my pastor. He's good at this stuff. PEACE
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Claire I care for you as a person. Get out from among the Anti-Christ before it's too late
From http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_3.html
"It is plain that this beast represents false religion. Preaching and teaching make men worship something or someone. But this is false teaching and lying preaching. That's evident from the fact that this beast looks like a lamb, looks like Jesus Christ and all that Jesus Christ represents, but in actuality is a beast. He claims to speak like Jesus, but has the foul breath and fiery speech (in the eyes and nostrils of God) of a dragon.
This beast will not arise from Hinduism or Buddhism or any other pagan religion; he will arise out of Christianity itself. Few Christians would believe a Ghandi's claim to be Christ. When one looks at Revelation 19:20, that becomes obvious. There, in the passage that describes the defeat of Antichrist, we read that the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that worked miracles before the beast. This second beast represents false Christianity, the apostate church that calls itself "the Church of Christ" (we mean by this designation the broad "church," and do not intend it to be confused with a certain denomination of that name)"
The work of the second beast is the service of the first, the cooperating with the Antichristian world government. What is that service? It is causing all the world to worship the first beast. He will call all men and women of the world to bow down to the first beast, who is the "Savior of the world." Now the prophecy of Revelation 17 comes to pass: the kings of the earth commit fornication with the whore, the false church.
If one asks what he should look for in the days to come, we say this: there will be political union all nations will be gathered together into one mighty empire. This is the first beast. There will also be religious union, joining all the religions and religious empires of the world. The powerful ecumenical movement of today, led by the religions of Christianity, will in the end fully succeed, swallowing up all the other religions of the world. You may expect to see one man over it all. Antichrist.
AND, who is this? The Christians
John 16:1-4
1. I am telling you this to keep you from being afraid.
2. You will be chased out of the Jewish meeting places. And the time will come when people will kill you and think they are doing God a favor.
3. They will do these things because they don't know either the Father or me.
4. I am saying this to you now, so that when the time comes, you will remember what I have said.****************************
Where are you Claire? Hurry back.Relax, Deborah. Lol. You have given me a lot of information to wade though and then there are other comments. Just chill.
Wow you wore her down their is no convincing Deborah, a Jehovah Witness?
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
There are so many books missing from the English Bible, the Christians can't possibly know all that has happened and being said.
If they had those books (which were left out intentionally) they might see things differently.Are you referring to OT, NT, or both?
Any specific books that are available? I'd be interested.totally unecessary books. There is so much in the bible already that any extra reading is overwhelming. To say that a book of which God is very much concerned about is lacking... is a poor opinion of Gods abilities.
These extra books would only lead to more bad interpretations and wrong doctrines. Canon is complete.ohhh....i see your back and your gonna show some of us how to be good christians again.....
i truly hope your comments did not hurt Ernest's family...and they were able to look beyond
The books she is speaking of are talked about over and over in the Bible. They should not have been eliminated. Though some may have been lost.
You think more knowledge causes problem but in reality it brings clarity.
The English canon is not complete without these books.
Knowing these books are missing is no reflection on God's abilities.
Who are you or anyone to say they are unnecessary? After all they are in the Bible
Sweet, so am I Messianic? Its not my fault it was Gods and I am his slave.
It was that whole one who argues with God thing. Some how I no longer fear death but I never argue with it.
God is only One. Jesus (Peace be upon Him) was a Prophet descended on Earth to propogate GOD's message. As it says in the Holy Quran : Say: He is Allah, the One and Only! Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not nor is He begotten. And there is none like unto Him. (112:1-4) For more details please see videos of Dr. Zakir Naik on youtube regarding this topic.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Those that give us food nourish our mortal body only, those that entertain and instruct us in things of this world enchant our lower minds alone, but those who awaken the eternal spark within us, to them love and devotion are ever due.
—From The Zohar. He's only Jesus six days a week. On the seventh day, he goes fishing...that's where he got the fishers of men idea.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
God AND his word is Light. To understand we must seek the light.
Habakkuk 3:4 "And [his] brightness was as the light; he had horns
[coming] out of his hand: and there [was] the hiding of his power."
God is the Light. He not only is as the Light, He is the Light.
The "horns coming out of His hands" show the power of His work.
"Horns" symbolize power and "hands" symbolize work. This could, also,
mean that light was streaming from His hands. The Light of God is like
a garment God is clothed in to keep mortal man from seeing Him. Most
who have an experience with God, see a bright Light, or a fire. The
power of God is hidden in that Light. I John 1:5 "This then is the
message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is
light, and in him is no darkness at all." Revelation 21:23 "And the
city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for
the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb [is] the light thereof."
Isaiah 60:19
The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee: but the LORD shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.
Psalms 37:4-7
4. Delight thyself also in the LORD: and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart.
5. Commit thy way unto the LORD; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass.
6. And he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light, and thy judgment as the noonday.
7. Rest in the LORD, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass.
Psalm 119:105
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
Psalm 27:1
The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the LORD is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?
Psalm 36:9
For with thee is the fountain of life: in thy light shall we see light. - JoelMcLendonposted 13 years ago0
The Kabbalah and The Torah
The students of Kabbalah desire to know God in order to emulate Him and thus come close to Him.
To come close to God, the Creator of the universe, students of Kabbalah seek to intellectually comprehend what might be termed the "physics of creation." The focus of Kabbalah is never the acquisition of wisdom in and of itself. Wisdom is only a tool, a bridge to connect us to our Creator through comprehension of the creative process, which is ongoing, dynamic, and constantly responsive to the feedback from creation.
The first person who devoted his life to discover and come close to God, and bring others close to God, was Abraham. Due to his great self-sacrifice, many deep secrets of creation were revealed to him, allowing him to experience what he desired most--a closeness and sense of oneness with his Creator. The very first classic text of Kabbalah, Sefer Yetzirah, "The Book of Formation," is attributed to Abraham.
The Torah has two aspects--"the revealed" and "the concealed" or the "body" and the "soul."
The "body" of the Torah is comprised of laws of behavior. These laws express the will of God for our ultimate and absolute good in this world and the World to Come. In Hebrew, this aspect of the Torah is called gufei Torah, "the body of the Torah," or nigleh, " the revealed dimension [of the Torah]."
The "soul" of the Torah--or Kabbalah--is comprised of the secrets relating to God the Creator, the creative process, and God's Providence over creation. These secrets possess many dimensions of mysteries and mysteries within mysteries. In Hebrew, this aspect of the Torah is also called sitrei Torah, "the secrets of the Torah," or nistar, "the concealed dimension [of the Torah]."
God gives us the understanding of both dimensions of the Torah because He desires that we become partners with Him in the process of creation, so that we may be worthy to receive the ultimate reward of becoming one with Him. We do so when we freely choose to align our will with His will. To align our will with God's means living by the commandments of the Torah, delving into its mysteries, and devoting our lives, like Abraham, to bring into the world's consciousness transcendent and infinite light--light which appeared at the outset of creation but which subsequently became hidden from human eyes.
Related Discussions
- 21
If Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, is He then one being in heaven?
by ii3rittles 10 years ago
If Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, is He then one being in heaven?I always thought Jesus was the son of God, in all actuallty. I never knew the meaning of "the son of God" until just now. So now I realize that God came in human form and was called Jesus, Jesus and God are the same. So...
- 21
As a Christian who believes Jesus is the one God, how do you interpret John 14:1
by Demas W Jasper 8 years ago
As a Christian who believes Jesus is the one God, how do you interpret John 14:16, 28 and 15:10,21?
- 99
Do you believe in the Trinity and why?
by Eric Dierker 9 years ago
Do you believe in the Trinity and why?What many people do not realize is that the Trinity is dogma from those not empowered by the same spirit as those that wrote the Bible. It is not sacrosanct. I happen to believe that Jesus is the Son of God and one in the same as God and that it is a Holy...
- 74
Is anyone in the Church filled with the Holy Spirit?
by Disappearinghead 14 years ago
As I drove to work this morning I thought in VB codeSub Trinity()Do If Trinity_doctrine = False then Holy_Spirit "3rd_Person" Holy_Spirit = "Gods_Power" If Church_doctrine =...
- 49
No where in the bible that I know of does it state that we are to love the Holy
by graceinus 9 years ago
No where in the bible that I know of does it state that we are to love the Holy Spirit, why not?I find it interesting that the bible does not inclued love towards the Holy Spirit. However, the Holy Spirit is inclued when we are baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy...
- 38
Jesus god-the-father: a fallacy of Catholics Protestants
by paarsurrey 13 years ago
Catholics Protestants think Jesus was god; rather as some say he was "god-the-father"; then the Christians say that Mary was begotten by god-the-father.It is a wrong concept; because that would makes Jesus , I take refuge with the Creator God, husband of Mary.I don't think it is a correct...