A shocking message?
I would be interested to see what fellow believers think about this message, non believers can have their say, but I think this video particularly applies to believers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cncEhCvr … ure=b-vrec
Most of you will fail to listen to the whole tape, so be it, if you cannot bear to hear what is said, best not to comment!Baptist evangelism, one of the worst kind of Christians. He is a perfect example what is very wrong with the world.
Look Troubled Soul, you obviously are not a Christian, so why do keep up the attacks on those who are and their post! Go hang with your own kind.
What qualifies one for being insane, nowadays? Just curious...
I don't believe in eternal hell concepts either, does this make me a madman of some sorts?
That's debatable! If you were not insane, you would not interject your garbage thoughts into serious meaningful discussions, just so that you can upset and pi$$off the religious community like you constantly seem to enjoy doing.
Any person who seemingly derives pleasure out of upsetting others, in my mind must be insane.
What part of "non believers can have their say" did he misunderstand?
Exactly the words I used Troubled!
Living in the UK, I often forget the brainwashing that happens on the other side of the pond.
I like the part akin to "but If I am telling the truth, you must conform, or burn in hell!" and the frequent usage of "we have no hope".
That's about the scariest horror movie I've seen this year!Neither do I. Hell is another man-made "boggie man" used for thousands of years to scare people, who can't think for themselves, to believe what you want them to believe in.
Yes Philanthropy2012, this brainwashing wide spread over here in the states by the poorly educated and mentally lazy. Of course not everyone buys into this BS.
John You know where I stand on this video. It is a video that every person that calls themselves "A Born Again Christian" Must see! It will open the eyes of many, maybe in truth for the first time.
I believe he does have an insight into the deception many buy into. Like all things, this message needs to be understood in the context of the whole. He is addressing one issue and if one were to make a doctrine from this one message, it would lack. Because while what he says rings true, people must be careful not to go into the guilt, shame, and condemnation that comes from the enemy. God's grace enables, strengthens, and teaches the Christian how to follow God. It is true that faith without works is dead, but works without faith is equally dead. It is both an inner and an outer thing. My concern would be that people might watch this and think they just need to "work harder to be better" or be driven by "fear" but God's perfect love casts out fear. When I tried to "be better" because I was afraid of punishment, I just kept getting stuck. This is sin-conscious. Yes, we must understand the weight of sin and have true, godly repentance, yet if we keep looking at and focusing on the sin, then we will keep practicing sin. We are to set our mind on things above. We are not "sinners saved by grace." Sinner is our old nature--I know that I am now the righteousness of Christ. And as I believe, by faith, that I am the new creation that God says I am, then I am more likely to act accordingly. Identity is a core issue. I would say that this pastor has a message that is important and has a place, but it is one thread among many others. I understand the reason for his intensity--there are so many that say "I'm a Christian" and they are really not. The real question is how does one come into relationship with God. That kind of fruit cannot be stirred up by a human working harder. There is a grace, mercy, empowerment, part of God's character that needs to be seen, too. Really, it is best to look at all aspects of God, not just focus on one, lest our vision of Him is too narrow. Even the Bible shows different aspects of God--when Paul writes to such and such church he's focusing on one issue--and when he writes to another church it is a letter focused on a different issue. Doctrines should not be made from one book or one idea--but taken from the whole. I understand you are not stating this to be the case, I'm just posting for those that might listen to the video and think it presents the whole. He is focused on one issue and speaks to a specific deception. He identifies a problem--but now people must pursue the solution and one aspect of that solution is in understanding the true identity of God and the true identity of His children. Thanks for sharing.
Seek-n-Find. Absolutely, I must cosign this post. There is no condemnation who is in Jesus Christ. It means in the Word.
I have heard just now the 1st 10 min and it is awesome, I need to run for a few but will listen to it all the way. Powerful and amazing! Thanks for sharing!
greetings...the preaching is something i heard many times by young people or new people who just got saved...90%of the Amercian Christian church is dead...but there are true believers out there in every church and denomination...believers who have the faith to continue there belief and pray...there is much darkness and evil....most are decieved or lulled into sleep...being comfortable could be another word to describe most Christians....but are they Christians...?...are they true believers?...is their lamp burning...?there will be alot of surprises in heaven...those who thought they would make it didnt and those who with humility and the the fear of God prayed they would make it...didn't make it?...there are so many who put themselves above the rest as all knowing and all seeing....sometimes that depends on where they went to bible college or some teaching church....holiness standards are interesting....why...because every single Christian has a different level of them...why?maturity in the Lord (milk or meat) ...purification through the trials of daily walking with Jesus....many reasons for differences...now lets see...hmm...peter dinied Jesus many times that he was a follower..i guess paul would say peter is not in heaven...just a guess....i could be wrong...could i?...being save by grace so important...so many boast they have the edge on interpretation of the Bible...grace/boast/grace/boast....there there are the works....the fruits and most importantly the gifts...of the Holy Spirit....then there is justification...martin luther had something to say about that..paul is the 96 theses on the door of the american church.....so goes revival, pentecostal fire so to speak...i certainly know the Bible has the answers and the Holy Spirit reveals the truth about the interpretation of scripture...the letter killeth and the Spirt gives it life...you were once blind but now you see....paul should had a handle on that...didnt he?...before condemation is one cardinal rule...just one...Love...all types of love...somewhre it says love is first.....when paul understands love his maturity level will be like a meteor shining bright in the american dead church ....everyone builds their own church and puts a special name on it...why...a lack of love?..so many with so many gifts...not used today?...so many scars and thorns in our sides...fiery darts?...fear and trembling...ever meet satin?Jesus didnt jump off the high place....to take a spark and throw a bucket of water on it will do what?there we are back at the lamp again...american churches have alot of sparks but the flame isnt fully ignited and there are many reasons for that....many...satin love when a small smoldering spark is put out...he just loves it...hey look !here comes the anti-christ....oh another false prophet maybe...taking the bible and hitting someone on the head because his spark isnt as big as yours...satin likes that...just puts an extra nail in the coffin of the nearly dead...for me i believe in miracles....for me i like first thessolonians chapter 5...uplift, edify, pray for...what a concept...especially when love is involved...true love ....His love...understand that and you win the battle over darkness and evil and satin....the angels are watching...i pray
I recall seeing that video before. But am listening to it now to refresh my memory. I don't recall being against it at all; typical Christian message I guess? If so, then I've heard the message thousands of times when I grew up; in which case, Amen to it.
I am at "the narrow gate", Amen! Will let ya know after I've heard it all...........Done.
Amen to Washer's message!
Although there are some points where I disagree with the Southern Baptist churches doctrine (or at least their sometimes-feeble delivery of it), that's not in this message of Washer's, and it's a call to examine one's self under the eye of a Holy God. I see nothing wrong with it and many things good in it.
More preachers need to have even a percentage of his passion for wanting people saved.This is a great video. I enjoying viewing it.
A heart-cry for self-examination is a blessed reminder of our personal responsibility.
That is the body of the message that should be considered. Do you know that you know you are saved??? Is there really a tangible change?I have listened to this message several times. I love the preaching of Paul Washer, I think more of us need to stand up and preach the message of salvation in this kind of way.
aguasilver, hello my friend. See how much discussion brought your post above. I do believe that preaching by brother at youth meeting was result of frustration, which direction of our world is going. At times I was frustrated too. Yes, sin is the killer. But to bring the Law is not going to change anything since Jesus already took care of things - Law and sin. The Law does not change. It will show us who we are but has no solution. Here is New Covenant, Covenant of Grace. It will not destroy us but gives us freedom. It releases not curse but blessing. Jesus said Holy Spirit will come and will convince the WORLD of sin of unbelief in Me. Ruler of this world is judged. Good new is that we are under the umbrella of His work and His Grace.
Now we have to release our faith and love. 3-18-12.I say AMEN and AMEN! PAul Washer is right on it in this message. I have watched very many of his messages, they are truly amazing, God has given him wisdom beyond his years.
He speaks the truth. I listen to Ray Comfort and he also teaches this. I think both men are spot on and this needs to be shouted out because especially Americans have been deceived through easy believism (I know I have). They say there are none so enslaved as those who think they are free, I think you can apply this to people who think that they are Christians because they have been told that all they have to do is to recite a prayer.
To Brie…I believe: Thy will be done on the earth as it is in the heaven. There is joy. Focusing on sin begot sin. We cannot go back to Law, which is impossible to keep (except Jesus did). How one cannot sin if he believes he is the sinner? We are not sinners since Jesus became sin for us.
We are not sinners if we have received Jesus as our personal Lord and Savior. Otherwise, we remain in our sins.
Believing that you are not a sinner does not save you.... salvation through the blood of Jesus, makes you "not a sinner".
The idea is not to go back to the Law of the Old Testament, but to live by the Law of the New Testament.... the Law of Love; which cannot be lived apart from faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
- Reasonably Insaneposted 13 years ago
0I just joined so I hope it`s appropriate to comment.The brother ,in my opinion,speaks the eternal truth of Gods word.A real, stirring,convicting and yes,frightening message. Absolute truth.I`m going to share it with others.
I must confess I have not watched the video; at 58 minutes, I do have better things to do with my time. So I googled to find the salient points.
In short he thinks the majority of Christians are going to hell because they don't walk daily in repentance. He sounds like a pretty joyless character, preaching a salvation by works (continual personnal effort to live in repentance, trying hard not to sin, constantly watching ourselves to see if we are sinning, sucking out all the joy that this world occasionally brings). I'm not convinced. Nobody doubts the Corinthian Church who were riddled with carnality yet Paul calls them babes in Christ.
Well I'm not going to spend my life naval gazing looking for sin, constantly worrying that I don't measure up. Life is for living.
Romans 4:5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.
Romans 8:1 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,
Here's one of his quotes
“Isn’t that a horrid thing to say about ourselves? I mean if we were to commit a crime I would have to say that being able to delight in almost anything other than just tarrying in the presence of God is the worst crime.”
What a load of sanctimonious bollocks.
Paul Washer....shut up.Thank you Vladimir. I sometimes wonder if I'm just turning into another ranter on a soapbox.
*************************************
Yet God said he does not justify the wicked. He doesn’t lie.
If he said it, I believe it.
Exodus 23:7
Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked.I don't think that he is asking you to walk on eggshells. Saved people don't have to walk in such tight scrutiny. Or according to a man-made holiness.
The Holy Spirit signals to us what to do and what not to do. Being led by Him in our daily lives, in our daily decisions is the gist of the message. But, of course, you must first be born-again.
Many try to live a "Christian-Life" without knowing Christ. These are the people who become adamantly offended at the suggestion that there might be something wrong with them.
The message was saying, "Don't try and use a profession of faith in Jesus Christ as a safety net for your life. Don't deceive yourselves by thinking that you are free from consequences because you say that you believe in Jesus. You can't save yourself... only Jesus can save you. Jesus will cause a real change inside of you. So, make sure your profession of faith is real and that you are ready for a change in your life before you declare yourself to be a Christian"
That's not hard nor is it unreasonable.......make it real or leave it alone
Repentance is one thing, being condemned by a man who ignores NT teaching and thinks we should all be like him is another.
Do you personally feel condemned? If you do, perhaps you should examine yourself and check your stand with God.
When you know that you are saved, you are not offended or condemned by another man's opinions and, you are willing to test what is being said by the Word of God and the Holy Spirit within.
All the man was saying is "Christian, make sure that your are saved".
Wow, I go to sleep for a few hours and wake up to these comments, wish I had made it a hub now!!!!
Disappearinghead, (and Vladimir) I would suggest that when you can find the time, do listen and understand the whole preach, like you I started off with some "Oh no here's another Baptist probationary nutter" but stayed the course to see whether I agreed finally, and more importantly why I disagreed.
When I heard him out, I understood his points.
If one holds fire on the disposition if 'hell' that he holds, there is a whole lot of truth in the preach.
TM, thanks for your comment, it correctly sums up what the non believer should state, and reaffirms my take on what was preached. I would guess you heard not very much of the preach,before you confirmed your viewpoint, which is a pity, I would have liked you in particular to have heard and refuted point by point WHY you think he is wrong, but that would be a hard task, so I understand why you cut and run.
To everyone else, thanks for your commentary on his preach.
There IS a major difference between those who truly seek to KNOW Christ, and desire 100% to be known by Christ, and those who have bought the 'sinners prayer' insurance policy and continue in the world, we do well to remember that King David was a truly great 'friend' of God, but also a seriously flawed sinner of mega proportions.
I subscribe to what I call the King David accord: Repent often, keep a short account.
Nobody is perfect, but Christ does give us the option of sinning less, though we will never become sinless, and repenting to gain forgiveness.
I have never been a probationist, once you are saved, you are saved.
But the emphasis must be on the word ONCE.A hard task to refute Washer's delusions?
aguasilver, brother. I do not know if I have enough time. This preaching is not unfamiliar to me. That was the reason I did sin in past and backslide. Apostle Paul said you may do all things but not all things prosper (It does not mean we may sin, he is talking about being negative).
Then some presume one sin and need repent. It is true. But many come to presumption one sin and manipulating by sin and guilt. They meditating too much on sin instead of Grace. Accusing is from the devil. Preconceive idea is the culprit. See each thief thinks all are the thief. Many Christian have judgmental spirit and it has to be change. I like positive preachers and I am one of them as much as I can. Jesus taught us go to preach good news, not preaching the sin.
Then one should tell me what is the sin. Every sin is sin of unbelief. Do they preach the faith? No. They do not have an idea what the faith is. Then they preach sin and guilt.
BTW it is up to Holy Spirit to convince the world of sin of unbelief in Him.
PS. Paul W. said the fact about sin but not the truth, which make set us free.Well said Vladimir.
There simply is no encouragement in our faith to tell people they are no good sinners. To put such a downer on people smacks on the same attitude of the Pharisees. They loaded people with burdens of law, these load people down with burdens of guilt and "you are not good enough and you don't try enough" messages. It is faith in Christ that makes us righteous, not the spiritual/emotional equivalent of self flagilation.
The gospel is good news; not strings attached news with moving and narrowing goal posts.Well Agua, I got about half way through, and yes he make some valid observations on the state of the Church. But his conclusion that the majority of Christians are going to end up in the classical description of hell is way off scripture, but I guess that's his Southern Baptist inheritance.
When Jesus talked about the narrow gate leading to life, he's talking about life in this life; the wellspring of life, love joy peace patience kindness etc, the fruits of the spirit, not some life in heaven. Likewise the broad gate that leads to destruction is an observation of empty meaningless lives in this life.
Jesus never made continual repentance a condition on being "saved". He accomplished all that was necessary completely apart from us. He simply calls us to believe in him. As he works to accomplish his will in us, he by his spirit nudges us, challenges us, to repent according to his programme. It is God who accomplishes the work in us.
We are not lower than worms deserving "eternity in hell". We are not born filthy sinners. These ideas are not in scripture, but were invented by the Church. God's wrath historically was poured out on the living, not on the dead. After large numbers of people were killed, his wrath always abated.
As an antidote to the Western view of heaven and hell, here is an interpretation based on the 1st century church and today's Eastern Orthodox views. I found it very interesting.
http://aggreen.net/beliefs/heaven_hell.html
what i admire about paul washer is that he ministers to non-believers. may God help him in his endeavors.
Aqua,
I'm familiar with this sermon. I believe I've listened to the whole thing in the past.
I believe it would be best not to generalize to one particular, hand-selected group of people who claim the name of Christ. I saw this happen once in a Baptist Sunday School class for singles, and I wish it hadn't. I was in the S. S. class, and the choir director of the church was teaching that morning. There were probably 50 singles present, many of whom I knew. Our teacher said that probably 90% of church members who said they were Christians, weren't saved in reality. Sorry, I'm not buying that only 5 in our group were headed to heaven. That is dangerous generalizing.
It would be more correct to say that, of all the people who have lived on the earth, the number who are true Christians is very much the minority.
On a more positive note, Washer is delivering the sermon to the correct group of folks, who are teens or adolescents. However, I didn't need a Paul Washer, when I was 18, to examine myself in the faith. I went through much angst at that age, and only from an off-hand comment or sentence in one sermon from a youth director. I have had a very confident faith since I was 22, praise be to the Lord, who showed me a few very important things.
The message is going to get out, sometime, somewhere. Some of these young people in his audience need to truly deal with sin in their lives, and some are probably worrying about nothing. I think all adolescents are going to deal with these issues, and it will only shake out over time. At some point, it will be obvious just who we will serve.I agree with much of what you say here.
I don't buy into the concept of "true Christians" or the idea that only a subset are actually saved. Who is defining the boundaries here? The preacher at the front? By what measure do we divide the sheep from goats? Should we even attempt to or is it God's job?
I'm not going to let a preacher define for me what is the width of the narrow gate: I'm not going to submit to his definition of a Christian. We should not be spending our lives worrying about who or what we are. It is God's Spirit's job inside us to tell us what we are or how we are doing. He works in us to accomplish his will in his time. Left to natural processes, He will put his finger on issues in our lives as he sees fit, or we may suddenly realise one day, that a certain 'sin' doesn't appeal to anymore.
Contrary to popular belief the world is not all evil and sin. There are many cultural things we can enjoy and participate in with good conscience. Life is for living abundantly, carefree and free.
I'm not saying that there is no room for people to point out specks in our eyes occasionally, but no preacher at the front is in any position to declare that an individual or many individuals are going to some 'hell'. Did Jesus or Paul ever make such statements? No.Jesus did
Matthew 3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Matthew 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Matthew 13:50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
just to point out a fewDisappearinghead, hello. Not sure to whom you addressed discussion. I am also using term (perhaps wrongly) true Christians. So I my say oops. I am using it to distinct from religious. Yes, only Holy Spirit and/or our spirit can convince us of doing wrong. Sometimes I say Lord am I doing right? But on purpose I am programming myself by hearing Word. I am listening New Testament in Hebrew. What a blessing! It takes 14 hrs to listen all. Bless you.
I think the point of the video that I found good, was that it reminds ALL believers to constantly judge themselves, as we are told to do.
I agree that this particular 'message' was 'probationist' in it's delivery, and I am totally against probationism, believing that once saved, we are saved no matter what, however as I have said previously, the emphasis IS on the word ONCE, and I have met too many Christians who do not appear to have made that ONCE crossover from the world to the Kingdom.
For those who are saved, but not examining themselves and (shall we say) continue in the ways of the world, then the loss they experienced would be in their eternal rewards, not their salvation.
Thanks for the answers, it's good to see we have opinions worth sharing.The Bible tells you to do a lot of things that you don't do. In fact, I was criticized for asking why Christians don't follow the Bible and you agreed with the criticism. Aren't you contradicting yourself, now?
Sorry TM, can you dig up the earlier post where I did whatever I did:
"I was criticized for asking why Christians don't follow the Bible and you agreed with the criticism."
I would need to see the context before I could answer you correctly (and I am not being obtuse, but you do post many comments on many forum questions).
As the comments above point out, there are many schools of thought on 'doing what the bible states'
Deborah has recommended incising Paul from the text completely, others will refer to OT texts ONLY when reaffirmed in the NT, and so on.
Basically any believer is staking their eternal destiny on what they not only believe, but judge themselves upon.
There is a fair degree of discernment required for believers, and (for instance) the future King David, when escaping from Saul, basically conned the priest into giving him the shrew bread (set aside for temple use only) and got away with that, but suffered greatly for taking Goliath's sword (by fixing himself to be a warrior King).
That's why we are called to judge OURSELVES and when we see error, repent and correct the imbalance.1 Corinthians 11:30-32
King James Version (KJV)
For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.For if we would judge (G1252) ourselves, we should not be judged (G2919)
But when we are judged (G2919), we are chastened of the Lord,
G2919 is the judicial judgment meaning God has judged us in a courtly manner and decided that we need chastisement to correct us.
Kreeno is to try, punish, conclude, avenge.
G1252 means: to take a look at (ourselves, in this context) and assess ourselves fairly implying that our objective is to make corrections. We cannot judge ourselves because the grace of God and his perseverence is always upon us pushing us forward in Him.
Romans 8:1 there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.Touche!
Thanks!.... now where did I put my Greek-Hebrew Study bible?
*************************
That's because they were letters that Paul didn't know would end up in the Bible and never should have. Plus his teachings are in opposition to Yahshua's and his Apostle's doctrine.Who made up those "schools of thought" - your God or men? Do men outweigh the Word of your God in that regard? Are men allowed to pick and choose whatever they want from the Bible?
What does that have to do with cherry picking the Bible and the fact there are over 38,000 denominations of Christianity who have not corrected any imbalances as yet?When I read your posts, it's like watching a small dog chasing a car in some vain belief that if it barks long enough and loud enough the car will stop.
Nobody is interested in playing verbal table tennis with you.
This 'reply' you posted above has no relevance to the discussion we believers are having, it's simply another smokescreen to attempt a diversion.
Did you watch the full 58 minutes of the video we are discussing?
If not then you really cannot add anything to these posts,
But God has clearly shown me that He loves you, and wants your attention, so feel free to do whatever you feel attacks your Heavenly Father, and bark like that small dog chasing a car, and remember that when you finally run out of venom and steam,Christ will be there to comfort you and welcome you home.As opposed to reading the ridiculous childish fantasies contained in your posts?
And yet, here you are, contradicting yourself once again.
Yes, I understand reality is a smokescreen diverting your attention away from childish fantasies.
Really? Let's see how much you can add to these posts...Woof Woof....
OK, not politically correct, but all your reaction deserved.Not politically correct, but certainly childish.
Saying that christians do not follow the bible is kinda a silly thing to say.
All christian follow as much of the bible as possible. We all have failings, we all slip and fall and are enticed by sin - but this is what brings us to love God more and more when we know that God does not give up on us. He does not shove us to one side and say "oh well that's it for you, i'm done". We can love a father who treats us well. It is hard to love a father that just slaps rules on ya and expects obedience and once ya fail, whaCK! ya get excommunicated. This is why christians invite people to come and see that the Lord is good and his mercy endures forever. Its a beautiful thing that we get to grow gracefully into what God has for us.It's called observing reality in which we observe that Christians do not follow the Bible, yet they themselves wield it on others.
No, they don't.
Yet, that is exactly what God expects from his followers, that they obey his rules, or didn't you know that? That's rich, considering Christians can't even obey their God's rules and commands, yet invite others to share in their hypocrisy.***********************
I agree with you here.of course you do. Its what the law states but it is not the spirit of christ.
What troubles troubled is that he shows no mercy. He does not understand grace. He thinks christians don't grow. He thinks that to read a law and to abide by it is a common and natural thing that anyone can do all the time without ever failing. He thinks that christianity is easy and those who have trouble are condemned and not given more chances to try again.
But we both know, deborah, that repentance has always been a way with God. Forgiveness for the sin and God says, "try till you get it right", we can see this plainly in David's life. Understanding that the grace of Jesus Christ and the love of God doesn't condemn the christian nor make them an unrepentant hypocrite gives them the ability to rise to the call again and try again. We are frail and human and modifiable in Gods eyes only excommunicated by one unpardonable sin - as jesus said.
If troubled came to God he would be no different than the ones he condemns but God would always work in him to bring him closer to God so long as he is willing. Yes theres a line christians can cross but we do not know the heart and cannot judicially judge that person. Only God knows when they have crossed that line.
So what exactly are you agreeing with?
-God is not forgiving?
-One two three strikes yer out?
-or that Gods love is quick to condemn?
-or that there are many unpardonable sins?
Pick one********************
No, none of the above. My ideas and opinions are not multiple choice
So I won't pick one.
I agree with this:
A Troubled Man said:
"Christians do not follow the Bible, yet they themselves wield it on others".
I see nothing in Troubled Man's post that I could use your Multiple Choice questions for, they just don't relate.
What are you reading?
I usually reply to the post I post my reply to.I am certainly not asking you for your ideas or your opinions.
I am asking you what conclusions you have come to about God through your research.
-God is not forgiving?
-One two three strikes yer out?
-Gods love is quick to condemn?
-There are many unpardonable sins?
which one of these do you foster in your belief?************
I already told you, none from your list. Why do we have to pick from your limited list?
And why do you always assume I don't understand what you are saying?, and therefore repeat it?
My opinions and my beliefs are about the same.
I believe something so it is my opinion.You parry and avoid
The correct Christian answer would be 'none of the above', but if you agree with Troubled then you must pick from the list for his views are of the list, although a short list it is an applicable list.
So either you agree with troubled or you don't.***********
You are a strangely weird person who doesn't understand the English language nor personal choice. And I'm NOT a Christian, wouldn't WANT to be.
Leave me alone.********
That's between BY and myself. If you think he is great, fine.
I know what I said to him and what he said to me. Try reading before commentingI was referring to:
"I'm NOT a Christian, wouldn't WANT to be."
That is what I granted as your right, I was previously under the assumption that you recognised Christ as who He stated He is.*********
What you really mean is you thought I had the same view of Yahshua that the Christians have. But since I don't how could I be of God.
The first Christians did not believe as the Christians today believe. The EssenesNo, what I stated was what I meant:
"I was previously under the assumption that you recognised Christ as who He stated He is."
John 14:6
Amplified Bible (AMP)
6Jesus said to him, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except by (through) Me.
and:
John 17 1:3
Amplified Bible (AMP)
WHEN JESUS had spoken these things, He lifted up His eyes to heaven and said, Father, the hour has come. Glorify and exalt and honor and magnify Your Son, so that Your Son may glorify and extol and honor and magnify You.
[Just as] You have granted Him power and authority over all flesh (all humankind), [now glorify Him] so that He may give eternal life to all whom You have given Him.
And this is eternal life: [it means] to know (to perceive, recognize, become acquainted with, and understand) You, the only true and real God, and [likewise] to know Him, Jesus [as the] Christ (the Anointed One, the Messiah), Whom You have sent.
So who do YOU say Christ is?She's told many, many times who she says Yahshua is (If by Christ you mean Yahshua)
But people refuse to read what she posts.Hi, nice to meet you,
I will always read Deborahs posts, OK sometimes they can be a mite long for a forum, but then so can mine, so I understand that some folk cannot dedicate time, and nobody is forced to read or reply to any post.
But the question is quite simple, almost a multiple choice:
Who do you say Christ/Yahshua/Immanuel (or whatever name He is known to you by) IS?
a) Who He states He is in the bible, the Son of God, the deity Lord Jesus Christ, in His virgin birth, in His sinless life, in His miracles, in His vicarious and atoning death through His shed blood, in His bodily resurrection, in His ascension to the right hand of the Father, and in His personal return in power and glory.
b) A myth
c) A prophet
d) a liar and madman
Answers on a postcard?********************************
When I post scripture from the New Testament, I am simply explaining what it says and means, as far as text, that is.
It does not mean I believe it.
I am Jewish and read the Hebrew and Greek scriptures in their language, so I believe differently than you.
We do not recognize any Jesus Christ..only Yahshua Messiah
According to the prophecy about Massiah it indicates he would be a human man not a God. He would speak God’s words. He would be Anointed because the Holy Spirit-power of God would be in him. He was a prophet, a priest, and a king. A servant of God and a messenger.
He always spoke of God and not himself. He spoke what God told him
He is not God himself.i have always apreciated your message and am now respectfully asking ???
I noticed a, would be and a, he was, in the paragraph above.
Do you believe that Yahshua Messiah as depicted in the NT was the Yahshua Messiah foretold in the OT? Just curious
Its so easy to diffuse your belief, deborah, in what you think is Gods way. You can't just go on avoiding questions that make your following of the law look ridiculous. These conversations should be enlightening to you and you should be somewhat edified by knowing that the law doesn't apply from the OT into the NT (otherwise it would be the same covenant) and that you can enjoy the spirit of the law without the law in Christ Jesus.
I can see why Paul had problems with law abiders
I will leave you alone to keep peace, but, I cannot say i will never respond to another post that is out of context and flawed.
good luck in the futurejoel i don't believe you are aware of anything.
I don't believe you have the tools to judge anyone fairly
and i don't believe you want to.
the law is done away with, carrying a bed on a sabbath will not offend God. eating seafood will not offend God. Healing on a sabbath will not offend God. Breaking the midrash will not offend God. Ignoring the talmud will not offend God - in which book i believe jesus is said to be just a magician and not wearing a box between the eyes will not offend God etc. If these things offended God then Jesus died in vain.Dear brother: I fully agree with you on this. Quite possibly enjoying a ham on rye will not offend God either.
**********
The blind lead the blind.
Enjoy your sin.Deborah since when is having a ham sandwich a sin?
***********************
In the Bible, God gives two requirements for an animal to be kosher/fit to eat for a Jew: Animals must chew their cud and have split hooves. Pigs have split hooves but do not chew their cud, so pig meat is not allowed.
As far as seafood, we may only eat fish that have both fins and scales.
From Deuteronomy, Chapter 14:8-10:
And the pig, because it has a split hoof, but does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You shall neither eat of their flesh nor touch their carcass.
These you may eat of all that are in the waters; all that have fins and scales, you may eat.
But whatever does not have fins and scales, you shall not eat; it is unclean for you.
While the commandment to follow a kosher diet falls under the category of laws which do not necessarily seem logical,
A observing them only because God commands us to,
B. there are moral lessons we derive from them.
Many people cite the vision that Peter had about the swine. But they ignore what Peter said about the vision. In the vision, Peter is starving and God gives him a swine to eat. So people say (and even many Bibles) that all food was declared clean.
Peter explained the vision and NOT ONCE did he say that the food laws were changed.
It was a vision that used clean and unclean food to represent God’s acceptence of the Gentiles.
omgosh dave you shouldn't have mentioned ham in front of the law abider. Now no one can be saved. lol. I hope that rye was not winnowed on a sabbath, dave.
(another reason for foods to become clean because we never ever know whats in processed foods or when they were made or if the land was fallowed etc...)
remember:
Matthew 15:17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? (OBVIOUSLY FOOD)
Matthew 15:18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
Matthew 15:20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. <ANOTHER KICK AT THE CEREMONIAL LAWS
Mark 7:18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; (EVEN FOOD)
Mark 7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
Jesus words deborah
oh the conundrum
why would God use food to describe people? He is showing Peter that even as food does not defile a person neither does race. Peter took a while to decipher it because he was charged with going to a gentile house. Which he said that which God has called clean .... how did Peter get to this conclusion? that unclean food is now clean and unclean gentiles are now clean. A new covenant perhaps.
Hello A Troubled Man. Can you try to keep the law and being an example for us being not hypocritical?
Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say.
What Vlad is trying to say is this, "Have you looked in the mirror of your soul lately?" and, "Since you so are so keenly aware of the problems of Christianity and its followers, would you mind becoming an example of what we should be?"
- brotheryochananposted 13 years ago0
I've listened to the video.
We need to notice that he is at a youth conference. We need to understand that he said there are stronger christians in other countries. Countries where there is persecution.
Probably most against this type of message would be the cultural christians. A serious christian would nod frequently and be glad to hear this kind of word being preached. Too often Jesus 'our buddy' is at the forefront while Jesus our judge is pushed to the background. Jesus is both.
I am glad for Pauls preaching and am made aware that there is much information in what he says, whether it step on toes or not.
1 Peter 4:18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Jude 1
1. Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:
2. Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.
3. Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
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.
5. I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.
6. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
8. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
9. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
10. But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
11. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
God Said
Jonah 3:10
And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.
Yahshua (Jesus) Taught that our works are important.
Matthew 5:16
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 16:27
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
John 14:12
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
Revelation 2:26
And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
His Followers
James 2:14
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
James 2:17
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
(Works without faith is not dead, it still does something good for whoever, or whatever you are doing it for)
James 2:18
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
James 2:20
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? (Here, vain means, not producing results. Useless)
You may have all the faith you want, but without action (works) you accomplish nothing. (In a sense in having faith without works, you are saying you want God to do it all)
James 2:21
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Works makes your faith perfect
James 2:22
Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
James 2:26
For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
We have to have faith and works to be justified. Works are just as important as faith.
James 2:24
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Yahshua said we would be judged by our works
Revelation 20:12
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Revelation 20:13
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Following Paul’s doctrine and believing every word he says, will just get you in trouble, and separate you from God.Still pumping this one are you.
There is a difference between works that are done by the flesh - such as that of the Law and works that are done by the spirit of God - such as mercy and love, compassion.
to show an example: we can have all the church bazaars we want to, fill up the calendar, we can sit on the corner with pamphlets, we can feed the hungry and shelter the homeless but if we do these things NOT in the name of Christ then our works are useless.
Matthew 18:5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.
Mark 9:41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
This is what james is talking about. Works that are not driven by faith in God - like giving the last of the rent money to a stranger or tithing 10%+ or giving two coats when one is asked for - not driven by faith in God - take the jehovah witness on the corner with pamphlets for example - did God tell her to be there? pretty unlikely, but she is just doing some work hoping to gain acceptance of God for the work that she is doing.
Faith without the proper works or deeds is a dead work.
Faith with the proper works or deeds with gain a reward.
1 Corinthians 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; <- descending quality
1 Corinthians 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. (fire = gods judgment)
See that, what sort of work is it - clearly there is more than one sort of work, some work or deeds that will last - the gold and silver, precious stones - and some work that will not last.
1 Corinthians 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. (abide, stand the test, remain - be an appropriate work and not some fleshy program that merely fills in time)
1 Corinthians 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. (14 and 15 are the same man. Some of his works by the spirit abide, some works by the flesh are burned but because he has done some acceptable works he shall be saved but still suffer loss due to the insufficient quality of some of those works)
To me this is obvious that there are two kinds of works: acceptable and unacceptable, spiritual and religious.
Saved People have to be judged according to their works because their sins are atoned for and no longer are remembered, buried and forgotten. So God cannot judge his people by their sins and so what remains, what they have done in his name and you read my hub and how i discern what "in his name" really means.
James 2:24
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
This pertains to those who say "i believe in God" and they do nothing. They do not preach the word, they hardly tell people they are christian. They do nothing. This kind of faith is minimal and not the faith that motivates people to be active in the things of God. So yah, faith alone will not save a person there must be fruit of that faith which are those deeds that are pushed by (real) faith.
James 2:21
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
What motivated Abrahams work? His faith that God would provide.
genesis 22 says Abraham got up early .... he did not falter
and why?
Genesis 22:8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.
Abraham had a faith in God that motivated him to follow Gods instructions. It was not the work that commended Abraham to God but abrahams faith that pushed the work forward.
Ya have to ask yourself "would abraham have done this work if he had not faith that God would keep his promise? and the answer would be NO.
His own testimony states that he had faith in God.
again deborah, its all about context and verses around verses and Gods spirit opening up the scriptures. Perhaps you have a talisman to open up scripture?
Weird...I see my comment on homepage, but not in the forum. Where in the blue blazes is the book of JAMES?
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
“Who is wise? He who can learn from every man”
Hebrew Proverb Utter nonsense, drivel, garbage... Yet another preacher, leading his flock to glory. While I respect his candor, he's just another preacher selling snake oil.
WOW! I really hope you are right!
I saw it differently.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Is any Christian willing to explain what you think is the New Covenant. How is different from the old?
Once you have answered the existing question, certainly.
Deb. I will reply if you give me time. I am writing a lot about it. Maybe Hub.
The new covenant is simply - a new covenant. It is not the old covenant revamped or parts of the old covenant. We have seen God make many covenants and each one is different than the others.
In this new covenant, Jesus dies and spills his blood - this is the passover blood on the doorposts of the Hebrews when in Egypt before they left. The blood applied saved them. Jesus blood applied saved us - not the law, not the written laws, mishna and talmud, just the blood. Jesus blood cleansed people in Him from a position of 'not right standing' or 'unrighteousness'. He atoned, but the blood has to be applied - not literally of course - but applied and this is done by way of invitation. As the blood on the lintel and doorposts was applied willingly, so must God be invited into the life and this is done by; vocal confession of sin, respect toward God and surrender of life. This one time confession/invitation sets the ball rolling, sets the ball rolling - it is not as paul washer said - a one time application and that is all - yes those who make mistakes and err have to come again to christ and "apply his blood even over and over. It is the application the blood of Jesus to the door of which Jesus said:
John 10:7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the DOOR of the sheep.
John 10:9 I am the DOOR: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
Basically that is all i feel led to say. That this covenant is applying the blood of jesus upon our lives and entering in through that door.
The new covenant is not the old covenant and it is not the old covenant with Jesus added to it. It is Jesus, his sacrifice to atone for all by the shedding of his blood.
John 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have NO life in you.
Why the blood: the blood cleanses the cells of the human body. It goes to every cell and removes the toxins. Blood is a purifier and a cleanser.Deborah Sexton posted:
"Is any Christian willing to explain what you think is the New Covenant. How is different from the old? "
Deb, shortly: Old Covenant is one of 15. Old Covenant was founded on the Law, which curbed the sin of flesh. But nobody kept the Covenant except Yeshuvah for us. Otherwise not keeping Covenant means curse of the Law, including death. The Israel has to keep Old Law forever (unless become new creation). They will be judged by it.
In the New Covenant we were already judged in Jesus. He took our place. It was no other way.
New Covenant is Covenant of Grace. It set man free. It is based on the Messiah, who took our sin and curse of the Law on Himself. It is His work not ours. We could not keep the Law.
Old moral Law is embedded in the New.
The sin of flesh is controlled in New Covenant from inside in opossum of Old controlled sin from outside.
Yeshuvah ministered to Old Covenant people, operating on sense knowledge, Paul is ministering to new creation and it is hard to explain to whom are not.
It would be brief summary of my understanding (© Dr. Uhri).
If this evangelist were a Baptist, he wouldn't be teaching that one can lose their salvation.
He's not saying you can lose it so much as he is questioning if you ever had it.
- JoelMcLendonposted 13 years ago0
I read what you said before you deleted it. You said Deborah dyes her hair and is therefore wrong. You also said she chose the Name Sexton for the “Ton of Sex” contained in the name and that makes her a seductress. Why did you delete it?
Mr. Yummy. It is clear to me now that you’re part of the opposer, the darkness, the A.C.
You need to seek and find God.
Yes, Deborah has her hair streaked. There is no law of God's that says she should not dye her hair.
That is a man made commandment. When she went to the Christian church they had the following commandments
1. No Jewelry (not even a wedding ring)
2. No Pants to be worn by women
3. Women were to have long hair
4. No dancing or listening to wordily music.
None of which was Biblical.
But they said the law had been done away with and their salvation wasn’t lost if they murdered someone, stole something, or got a divorce and remarried. etc
Mark 7:7
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
When Deborah’s mom was alive she suggested that Deborah use her (mom’s) maiden name as her pen name. She has used Sexton ever since.
I know you’re hoping that Deborah is a seductress, but she’s not. If you knew how she views you, you would stop.
Matthew 15:11
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
The stuff that comes from the mouth is from the heart…the things you say shows me who you are.
Matthew 15:18
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
Does this sound familiar?
Mark 7:21
For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,blah blah
so long as your read it that's fine, its all i intended.
People do things for reasons. And reasons are why people do things. Looking at the reasons is often interesting.
We know what the world says about what is okay and we don't ever think to improve upon what God has arranged. So obviously some worldly matters are more important than what was originally. Abstaining from the appearance of evil would be an interesting basis for a more suitable name, but obviously rather than sidestepping something so blatantly obvious again some worldly value seemed more appropriate.
You can quote all the scripture to me you want but that doesn't make any of it true and is rather a laugh, knowing the way you are.
so skirt around the post and avoid all conflicting questions and just focus on what makes you angry and when you see jesus all will be fine. Condemn people and judge people and mix the world into your lives and all will be good.
of course no worldly music is a law you should be able to abide by since we see that this is no more than mating rituals. Worldly music speaks of all the things that are against God unless you enjoy Beethoven. The spirit of that law rather states that we can enjoy music but it should really glorify God and not lift up the world. But of course that was not your interpretation at all, you just condemn it and spout unbiblical as you do all things you do not agree with.
not wearing pants is interesting of course in jewish times few people wore pants and they were more of a war attire. Women should not go to war. So again interesting but thats just one context of the message.
Jewelry is again interesting. Why adorn yourselves? Does an earring make a person more godly or less? Is it necessary. In jewish times earrings were a sign of ownership, hmmm. Why apply makeup? Does the person wearing the makes gain confidence from the makeup or does their confidence come from God. Does makeup make them look pretty or does God make them feel pretty. Do they apply makeup and cause people to lust after them? Again i suppose you did not discern this path of thought.
Women were to have long hair (for it is given for a covering for them) They were also asked to cover it up. Whats the first thing people notice about people hair. Women have 3-6,000 more hairs than men depending on the nationality. Hair is attractive. Ya gotta wonder huh.
As for gods laws about this and that. Are you lost without a law and unable to figure stuff out.
good luck in the future.**********************
We don't need luck.
We have God, the love of each other & Family, we are happy, we own our own business, we have a great home, some money, we are beautiful and healthy people, and we believe that is all because again we have God.Many people prosper in the world and do not have God.
Prosperity is not a sign of God in fact Jesus spoke against prosperity and more for just having ones needs met.
Blended religions have never been God's intention
If you don't need luck why sell a talisman for it?*********
I have an online store and sell many things. That is my right.
Like people who sell beer and wine, cigarettes, rolling papers, and condoms.
Nothing I do is wrong. You are just a sinful judger and I have God even if you hate it.
I do not lust after anyone..you do and that's adultery.
Go judge yourself.
Deb, I am happy you are blessed. But...
Do you believe it was plain coincidence the Holy Temple and city of Jerusalem was destroyed?
Yes Israel was chosen but they did not deal yet with always broke the law.
Can one keep the Law? There is nothing in the Bible as “try”.
Read this: Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, said the LORD, that I will make a NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant THEY BRAKE,…
Be careful of being pride.
*************
He's so jealous of you Joel.
Joel, in this I am on Debie's side. She is precious and valuable in God's eyes. I also was on troubles side but God gave me miraculous life.
*******************
Joel is my husband and he knows I am not on the troubled side of life as you call it. I live life the way God want's me too. And I have the way to salvation. Don't again say I don't, you're not God.
You're another judger, thinking you know who has God and who doesn't. Wake up.
Judging is a sin
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
I might add, there are thousands of Christian women who dye their hair. Big deal.
Please show scripture, besides Paul's, that says the law is done away with.I see nothing wrong with a woman adding some colour to her hair or her complexion so long as it is done in good taste.
Where I do draw the line though is with reconstruction of body parts to enhance physical attractiveness. "No Woman Can Improve Upon The Natural Beauty God Has Given Them, No Woman."
You can quote me on that.lol big deal you say.
of course you say that.
There are aspects to holiness and having the spirit of God that you haven't even begun to notice.*********************
You have the spirit of God? laughing at a dead man you didn't like with the I told you so attitude. And looking on women with lust,
Remove your mote please.***********************
That's a Christian thought
In Christianity, the physical world is viewed as an evil to be avoided.
In Judaism, the belief is that God created the physical world not to frustrate us, but for our pleasure.
Jewish spirituality comes through dealing with the earthly world in a way that uplifts and elevates.
Sex in the proper context is one of the holiest acts we can perform.
Jewish rabbinical schools teach how to live amidst the bustle of commercial activity. Jews don't retreat from life, we elevate it.
My husband loves my makeup and blonde hair as much as he loves my clean and scrubbed face, and natural brown hair.
I don't need makeup, I just like color.
But that's my husband and my business.But Deb, sin was not physical matter but spiritual. There is nothing wrong with physical world, but must be connected with God and His Word. Fighting, hating, arguing, being contrary Harry is not of God.
*********
I told you before to stop calling me Deb. I mean it, How would you like it if I called you Claude?
Make-up is about the physical world and so is dying the hair. It is not spiritual
Get your story straightI am sorry Ms Sexton, I overlook your request. My sincere apology. My name is Vladimir and Jewish friends call me Vlad.
********
Than stop being contrary fighting and arguing.
I have been showing those who want to know the truth about the New Testament. But you and BY keep playing the part of the devil, trying to stop me.
The scriptures do not say we cannot get angry. Prove it.
Stop calling me DEB, it is not my name..Claude
Am I missing something here? Is someone telling us that women can't wear make up, braided hair, dyed hair, jewellery, trousers, mini skirts? No surely not. We live in the 21st century and not some bronze age through to medieval age period?
Not everything in life must be done "to the glory of God"; we are not all sanctimonious types like Paul Washer. God has given us life to live and enjoy.Not missing something, but I think it kind of got lost up-thread, actually.
I'm following this thread, but I'm not a good debater (I still wonder why I was picked for the high school debate team). I don't argue too much, and I don't find dialectics my cup of tea.
But, yes, disappearing, I agree with you. I do not want fellow Christians telling me that I can't wear pants or jewelry. My manner of dress these days is often dictated by the needs of the moment. My trousers and nice jacket, often worn to my house of worship, are much more modest and cover me better than almost any dress one could find on the market (go to the ready-to-wear department, and you'll see what I mean!) I have short hair, but chemicals never touch it. The next woman may dye her hair -- and I say, go for it, if it makes you feel better.
Just in reading of Deborah's background, it sounds like her exposure to the Christian culture was to one much stricter in its requirements for women than the Protestant sect I grew up in.
But I don't care if you convert to Judaism, or if that's what you've always known. The cultural differences will still be there. Some are reformed, some are conservative Jews, and others are orthodox. Married orthodox women are required to cover their hair in public, whether with a hat, wig, or kerchief.
Jews cannot get away from these differences, even if their mingling with others not of their inclination happens only occasionally.
As a Christian, I must try hard not to look down on those with whom I have disagreements on style or personal sanctification. I should not make fun of people, but on the other hand, I need to watch my own personal conduct, lest I cause a fellow believer to stumble. My sister and her husband are paying for my niece's wedding, which will occur in a week. Even though the bride and groom wished to have champagne or wine served at the reception, there will be no alcohol served. Why, well because the groom's mother is Baptist to the core and would be offended. To do otherwise would not be very Christian or considerate. Instead, they are taking the way of love.
Paul said it best in Romans 14:5 -- "One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind."I agree with what you say. Though to be honest I think the groom's mother sounds like she is not demonstrating love to the couple on their big day by choosing to be offended by alcohol, she is denying them a small pleasure at their wedding.
************
Yes brotheryochanan said many times in this thread, I am a seductress and sinner because I dye my hair and wear makeup. Even said it to Joel,. Joel would like to break his nose and jaw at the same time.
I often wonder if people are fighting so dilligently in defence of God, OR of their own private interpretation of GOD.
I'm right and everyone else is wrong. If that is correct? I'm going to be SOooo lonley in heaven. Just kidding*******
Well that's not my intention. I am sharing a different side to the coin. Trying to help.So sorry ... You were the furthest thing from my mind when I posted that statement.
help requires truth, even in this you are out of context.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Read these facts about the Messiah. Please read it all instead of coming back to me later about the subject
What the Messiah, had to be, do etc to be the Messiah prophesied about
Why Jews Don't Believe He Was the Messiah
The Messiah had to be Jewish. One is Jewish if their mother is Jewish.
The Messiah Had to be from the tribe of Judah. Under Jewish law, Your tribe is determined through the birth father only. Since Yahshua allegedly had no human father, he was not associated with any tribe. Therefore, Yahshua was not from the tribe of Judah.
Matthew and Luke made many mistakes in their so-called "genealogies" of Yahshua that eliminates him from messianic consideration.
In the Jewish Bible, the book of Chronicles lists the genealogy of Abraham through King David plus 29 more descendants. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke provide genealogies that are in conflict for Yahshua in an unsuccessful attempt to show that Yahshua fulfilled the messianic criteria of genealogy. .
The Messiah was to be from the seed of Davids son, Solomon.
Matthew states this but Luke said he descended from David’s other son, Nathan
Luke's record of Yahshua’s genealogy is fifteen generations longer than Matthew's genealogy from David to Yahshua. This certainly negates the Christian view that the Gospels are the "word of God,"
According to Matthew, Yahshua's grandfather was Jacob and according to Luke he was Heli.
Paul’s friend was Luke, and Paul knowing they had changed things in the book said this:
"But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless."(Titus 3:3)
"...nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than Godly edification which is in faith." (1 Timothy 1:4)
But because the genealogy of the Messiah is important. We have to seek the truth, and can't disregard these contradictions.So called geneologies lol.
Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was SUPPOSED) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
supposed (G3543 - properly, to do by law)
SO ARE WE TALKING ADOPTED? since Joseph was supposedly the father of Jesus that would make him from the lineage. Now of course you can dispute this relevancy but, Joseph and mary being the parents of jesus refutes your dispute because Jesus would become of Joesephs lineage or did you forget this?You are one active, loquacious mutha ... I can just see ya now, going haywire over the Panspermia Theory, for example...
Dude, maybe you need to laugh a little more, eh?interesting theory which doesn't answer "how did the 'seeds' of life originate?" again this is a theory which stops just before it includes the only theory that answers all questions like this - God.
"There were the seeds (spermata) or miniatures of wheat and flesh and gold in the primitive mixture"
So are we supposed to believe that gold seeds just happen to appear in veins in solid rock? Or that gold reproduced itself?
just on those two notes this is one theory i will not go haywire over and yes, i had a good laugh
thanksI never said I was a supporter of that particular theory. I just sort of randomly selected one of the many crazy theories out there, to see how you would react. Good deal... At least you finally laughed a little...
hehe
good to hear you didn't jump on that bandwagon.
There are a lot of crazy theories around. I had to look at that one as i had never heard of it - so i googled it, spent a good half hour checking out different sites - figured that was enough of that.
I always get a good chuckle out of scientific theories man are they way out there - see i made a funnyHey, if ya like to laugh at crazy theories, then this YouTube video provides 10 of them, for starters... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y61-XqA … e=youtu.be
Of course, there are many more; enjoy!heh
that was trip lol
some i had heard of
I guess there are two types of theories: those that are contrived to fit a certain idea and those that adhere to what the evidence allows.
The human mind has seemingly an unlimited range of possibilities when contriving.
enjoyed I did <- that's greek lol
********
Your wrong. It has to be the natural birth father. You think you know so much because you look it up on the computer and believe what you read and misunderstand.
The Natural father makes a child of a certin tribe.
You are using the American lives to interpret the Jewish livesDeuteronomy 25:5 If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her.
Deuteronomy 25:6 And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.
Give it up deborah. Send back your pieces of paper, rabbi********
You're still wrong, that is an old Levitical law that WAS done away with. A brother's child would already be in the same tribe.
I'm not your Rabbe, but I am one.
You're a trouble making kid in an old man's body.
I know about the Jews..you only think you do.
Grow up.*************************
Revelation 11:2
But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
Luke's record of Yahshua’s genealogy is fifteen generations longer than Matthew's genealogy from David to Yahshua. This (does not) certainly negate the Christian view that the Gospels are the "word of God,"
i have a hub on this you might find interesting concerning zerubabel and pediah.
Skipping some names in genealogy is an allowed practice for truly the list of the genealogies would be incredibly long, logically speaking.
Matthew:
points out select pedigrees, nothing wrong with that and uses the sacred number 7. He starts with Abraham
Luke:
Starts with Adam and Luke uses 7's also. Luke comes at the genealogy from a slightly different perspective.
as to sons of fathers of the which there are two kinds; direct fatherage and the marriage of widow. The first brings his own children into the world the second carries on the lineage of the brother who died and these are the kinds of discrepancies that appear to make contradiction but when properly researched we find, there is no contradiction.
Nathan begat Melchi and Solomon begat Mathan. Mathan married Estha (traditional name) and they begat Jacob. Mathan died and Melchi married Estha and begat Eli or Heli. After Eli died Jacob married his wife and they begat Joseph.
Luke writes the geneology from Law of adoptions viewpoint and Matthew from paternal lineage viewpoint.
Either way Jesus is verified on both accounts of filling the requirements for messiah.
Jacob and Eli were what they called Uterine brothers.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Why Jews Don't Believe Yahshua Was The Messiah
It was prophesied in Isaiah 11, Isaiah 27, and Jeremiah 33 THAT the Messiah WOULD BRING THE JEWISH PEOPLE BACK TO ISRAEL. Not only didn't Yahshua bring the Jewish People back to Israel, the Jews were expelled from Israel shortly after Yahshua lived. This is the opposite of what this messianic prophecy requires.
It was prophesied that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The problem is he couldn’t rebuild it because it was not destroyed during his lifetime.
In Ezekiel, Micah, and Isaiah, it says the Messiah would bring peace to the world. Yahshua did not bring peace to the world. Israel was destroyed in two wars with Rome shortly after Yahshua lived. The last 2000 years have been some of the most violent times in history and the Church that was founded in Ya’hshua’s name caused many of these wars.
In Isaiah, Zephaniah, and Jeremiah, it says the Messiah will bring knowledge of God to the world. The Christian Bible contradicts the Jewish definition of God and contradicts all the Jewish teachings about God. Most of the world still does not know God. Oddly whenever a Christian proselytizes a non-believer he proves that the Messiah has not come yet. His proselytizing is a demonstration that the world is not yet filled with knowledge of God, or why else proselyte.
The Christian idea of "belief or faith" in this Messiah or in his identity is never mentioned in the Jewish Bible because it is not important. In Jewish terms, failure to fulfill even one of the messianic criteria is proof that person is not the Messiah .
In the Jewish Bible, a second coming is never mentioned.Thank you, you answered the question, as a Jewish believer you refute Christ being the Messiah, that is all I asked.
I see no point debating the opinion you hold, it is after all the whole basis of why Judaism is opposed to Christ and His followers.
If there is no 'second coming' in Judaism, we will simply all be content when He returns (or comes first time in your calendar).
At least now we all know where you come from when you post on NT subjects.*******
That's fine even though I said nothing about what I believe.
I said once I am Jewish but more, that my beliefs are eclectic.
So of course you won't read both my posts about the failed prophecies because it doesn't agree with you, you are just going to close your eye.
What do you say about the contradictions and failed prophesies?there are none
just sloppy interpretations
a contradiction btw is:
the sky is blue
the sky is red
there were women at the tomb
there were no women at the tomb
most people think an augmentation or a supplement is a contradiction which it is not.**************
These are contradictions and I can post many more
The Messiah was to be from the seed of Davids son, Solomon.
Matthew states this but Luke said he descended from David’s other son, Nathan
Luke's record of Yahshua’s genealogy is fifteen generations longer than Matthew's genealogy from David to Yahshua. This certainly negates the Christian view that the Gospels are the "word of God,"
According to Matthew, Yahshua's grandfather was Jacob and according to Luke he was Heli.
Here's contradiction
You are a child of God but you
believe a Jesus Christ is Messiah and worship him instead of God, but
Follows the teachings of Paul****************
LOL you think because you posted all that rubbish, that it's debunked. You need more education
**********
The Jews know how to interpret there own Language.
You don't know where I am coming from. Your extreme anger and indoctrination has blinded you.
Thank you very much for this explination.
I want to ask though,which verse refers to It was prophesied that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. "
I have just read Isaiah 10 & 11, & Isaiah 27,(again) and I will read these others also.
Again thanks for your reply.
edit it's after midnight and this old man gotta go fall down in the bed.Bear in mind Jerami that Christ was often speaking in spiritual terms, which we mere mortals can misunderstand:
John 4:19-21
King James Version (KJV)
The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.
Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
The Amplified states it clearer:
John 4:19-21
Amplified Bible (AMP)
The woman said to Him, Sir, I see and understand that You are a prophet.
Our forefathers worshiped on this mountain, but you [Jews] say that Jerusalem is the place where it is necessary and proper to worship.
Jesus said to her, Woman, believe Me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither [merely] in this mountain nor [merely] in Jerusalem.
In those sentences we see the 'Temple' being rebuilt, Christ is the temple we worship God within.If I am not mistaken, when Ezekiel spoke of the Jews being gathered back together in Jerusalem and of the temple being rebuilt. He was at that time in exile after Nebeuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem in 605 BC.
At the time Ezekiel spoke these words the temple had not yet been destroyed.
These verses concerning the rebuilding of the temple was speaking of it being built the second time.
Jeramiah spoke of Jerusalem and the temple laying waste for 70 years.
It was 70 years from the time of the first deportation in 506 BC and it was approx 70 years from the time the temple was destroyed in 586 until the second temple's construction was completed around 518- 520 BC.
As far as I am aware there is no mention of a third earthly temple being built.
Jesus did speak of establishing a spiritual temple which is located in the hearts of mankind.
Whether we agree or not I am curious as to why other people (including Debra) believe the things that they do for it helps me to understand why I believe the way that I do.
I don't think it wrong to readjust our mindsets concerning religions. I am always open to a more complete concept.****************
Jerami
History Of The Temples
The First Temple was totally destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE
It was rebuilt when Zerubbabel. was the Jewish governor.
The Greeks desecrated the Temple by erecting a statue of Zeus.
The Temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE in Jerusalem Siege .
The Romans banned the Jews from Jerusalem.
Although the Jews took Jerusalem back..the third Temple was never built.
When the Temple was destroyed it couldn't be the original Agua
**********************
Ezekiel 37:26-28
Micah 4:1
Isaiah 2: 2,3
This third Temple was to be built on the Temple Mount as described by the prophet Ezekiel. John's Gospel says that Yahshua said that the Temple would be destroyed and he would rebuild it in three days, speaking of his body in reference to his resurrection. The prophecy in Ezekiel is not speaking of the Temple as the body. It is speaking of the physical stone Temple.
Matthew's 26:60-62 and Mark says that Yahshua was accused of threatening to destroy the Temple. Luke doesn’t mention this at all.
Maybe the authors of these Gospels realized that Yahshua had not fulfilled this messianic criteria and these comments were intended to address this problem. In spite of the foregoing, the true Jewish Messiah must build the physical third Temple.
Prophesies of the Messiah teaching all nations the knowledge of God
ISAIAH: "They will neither injure nor destroy in all of My sacred mountain; for the earth will be as filled with knowledge of Hashem as water covering the sea bed." (Isaiah 11:9)
ISAIAH: "The glory of Hashem will be revealed, and all flesh together will see that the mouth of Hashem has spoken." (Isaiah 40:5)
ZEPHANIAH: "For then I will change the nations [to speak] a pure language, so that they all will proclaim the Name of Hashem, to worship Him with a united resolve." (Zephaniah 3:9)
JEREMIAH: "They will no longer teach - each man his fellow, each man his brother-saying, "Know Hashem! For all of them will know Me, from their smallest to their greatest - the word of Hashem - when I will forgive their iniquity and will no longer recall their sin." (Jeremiah 31:33)Ezekiel 37:1-14 speaks of the resurrected time. The 1,000 yrs or millennial kingdom. This is when God shall place his temple :26. If we look at the dimensions of the temple and the even just the river running through it we can clearly see that this temple will not be built by human hands.
So just looking at these scriptures alone we see that Ezekiel's temple is yet to come and it will be connected with the resurrection.
In many occasions of scripture this is the "in that day" which is being referred to, as in Isaiah 11.
Micah 4:1 But in the LAST days it SHALL come TO pass...
Were those the LAST days when Jesus waked... NO.
Please stop interpreting scripture falsely.
yes lets have a good look at jeremiah 31
Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a NEW covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jeremiah 31:32 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT that I made WITH THEIR FATHERS in the DAY that I took them by the hand to BRING THEM OUT OF EGYPT; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
UHOH... A NEW COVENANT NOT LIKE THE OLD COVENANT OF WHEN MOSES WAS IN CHARGE.... gee I wonder what this means, lol.
IT MEANS the OLD covenant is GONE and a NEW covenant is in its place. End of conversation about that.
Jeremiah 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; AFTER THOSE DAYS, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jeremiah 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will REMEMBER their sin no MORE.
Ezekiel 18 prophesies about God requiring each person to be responsible for their own sins which was something new to His people because this was part of that Old Covenant that sins shall be visited from parent to offspring. Now that has changed too.
The old covenant was laws written on stone then new covenant is laws (statutes) written in hearts.
as for your maybe and presumptuous conclusion about messiah building the physical third temple, which is ludicrous, The third temple is not for any other time than the resurrection, explained above and it will not be built it will descend. As to luke not mentioning about the temple thing, oh well no biggie. As for the gospels covering something up and trying to make stuff fit, also ludicrous, Jesus was speaking of his temple, the temple of the new covenant. Now as to the tearing down of the temple, yes that happened quite quickly and not one stone was left because when the fire burnt the temple the gold melted into the foundation stones and was scavenged thoroughly. So in this way did Jesus prophesy correctly and as we see, the temple was torn down. Why was the temple destroyed again you ask, simply because that old covenant dispensation of sacrifice was over and the temple was no longer needed.*********
Yahshua, James, John all spoke of their days as the last days. Try to interpret scripture correctly.
There was never a second coming in any of the prophesies,
The New Testament is all messed up.
Mark was copied from writings called "The Gospel of the Hebrews" and it recorded the life and acts of Yahshua.
Mark and Matthew differ and Luke contains things Mark and Luke doesn't.
Luke also doesn't contain some of the things Matthew and Mark does.
Like Hali being Joseph's father in one. and in another Jacob being Joseph's father.
Prophesies are not covenants, they are prophesies and I am not speaking of what you call the old covenant.
When God makes a covenant it does not nullify the covenants before.
There are and always have been many covenants,
These were the prophesies of the covenants and only a few of the prophesies were accomplished.
One of the genealogies has 15 more generations than the other genealogy.
You don't care about knowing the truth or seeking God, you only care about being right.
Why don't you read and compare and stop closing your eyes.Mark and Matthew differ and Luke contains things Mark and Luke doesn't.
Luke also doesn't contain some of the things Matthew and Mark does.
These are called augmentations and supplements they are not contradictions. What happened was Mark wrote his gospel from Peters eyewitness account of course the holy spirit of God helped and then the others read it and thought, "yeah i know that one i can add a bit to that" and so they did add their bits, but contradict, lol, notta chance.
One of the genealogies has 15 more generations than the other genealogy.
and they each omit hundreds of names. So what does your 15 more say? nothing detrimental unless you want it to. Does the fact that one goes back to adam add the extra generations and the other starts at abraham. hmm.
you only care about being right
I care more that you are not right. Do not misconstrue my corrections as being out of ego or hatred, i persevere because i hope that one time this stuff clicks in you.************************
If my genealogy says
Deborah Sexton begat
Her son Peter
and I add 15 more between us, than it says I am no longer Peter's mother and he is no longer my son. It would also make me many years older than Peter
Deborah Sexton Begat
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 begat
My son Peter
It does make a difference
If you can't see that 15 generations makes a BIG difference, how do you know which socks to wear?its called a lineage
when i take my socks off they look the same so which one goes on which foot doesn't matter. Shoes are a different story.
When God makes a covenant it does not nullify the covenants before.
There are and always have been many covenants,
Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a NEW covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jeremiah 31:32 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT that I made WITH THEIR FATHERS in the DAY that I took them by the hand to BRING THEM OUT OF EGYPT; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
It kinds says A NEW (H2319 chadash - new, fresh, new thing) COVENANT... I just assumed that new meant different from before as in kinda not like the other but new as in not the same or even close, but completely NEW and unlike any other.
Definition of new:
1.
of recent origin, production, purchase, etc.; having but lately come or been brought into being: a new book.
2.
of a kind now existing or appearing for the first time; novel: a new concept of the universe.
3.
having but lately or but now come into knowledge: a new chemical element.
4.
unfamiliar or strange (often followed by to ): ideas new to us; to visit new lands.
5.
having but lately come to a place, position, status, etc.: a reception for our new minister.
And i kinda backed this up with NOT ACCORDING to the covenant i made, like not as (interlinear) NOT like, not similar, not agreeing with.
And i kinda assumed that the fathers in egypt referred to the Law of Moses, that whole Law thing that happened back there in egypt with the fathers. Can't really include the talmud or the mishnah but i would like to.
Soooo i kinda am thinking, yes it does do away with that whole moses law thing that went on back there in egypt, yknow, being not in accordance with it. Soooo yah, new as in new, replacing the OLD covenant with a NEW covenant.
whatcha thinkin
***************************
You said
"Ezekiel 18 prophesies about God requiring each person to be responsible for their own sins which was something new to His people because this was part of that Old Covenant that sins shall be visited from parent to offspring. Now that has changed too."
Now Me
Well, God changed that a long time ago
Deuteronomy 24:16
“16. The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
“The son is not accountable for the sins of the father, and the father is not accountable for the sins of the son.
God just reinforced this later, but it is not a new thing.Really?
Exodus 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
Exodus 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
Numbers 14:18 The LORD is long suffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.
Deuteronomy 5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,
Deuteronomy 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
furthermore:
Ezekiel 18:2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The FATHERS have eaten sour grapes, and the CHILDREN'S teeth are set on edge?
This is saying the same thing that i quoted above, so obviously, that rule was considered to still be in effect, so much that God had to devote a chapter to it in His book.
But ignore the rest of what i posted and just focus on this.
in context what you wrote:
Deuteronomy 24:15 At his day thou shalt give him his hire, neither shall the sun go down upon it; for he is poor, and setteth his heart upon it: lest he cry against thee unto the LORD, and it be SIN unto thee.
Deuteronomy 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own SIN.
In this instance God is severely warning that anyone who does this particular thing shall be visited for his iniquity sin , but obviously, this one paragraph that you picked out by itself, alone and without backup supporting verses is put back into context and we see that Gods visiting iniquity upon the sons of the fathers was still in effect in ezekiels day. This scripture you quote does not have the power to refute the importance that God puts on generations.Wow! You guys are hardcore... Why don't we start on a simple plane, like why did the first part of the book of Ezekiel, describe aliens coming down from another world via spaceship?
The Book of Ezekiel is one demanding & commanding chapter in the Holy Bible, to say the least, dear mortal beings...hehehe
the first chapter of Ezekiel does not speak of aliens. There is nothing alien about it.
One aspect shows criteria of embarrassment; why would this outrageous vision be recorded since it is so far out there? The answer to that would be because it is true, and accuracy and proper content is the aim of the recording, otherwise, leave it out.
It's an amazing chapter and book, that i will forgo till necessity dictates.In our world we are subject to many things and one of those things concerns aliens of which we have heard of ufo sightings, seen pictures of ufos, and in the movies watched ufo or spaceships land, threaten the planet and travelled to distant planets in spaceships. All spaceships come to earth from above.
So when we read along in the bible about something coming down from above our minds immediately rush to our mental Rolodex and we find the heading ufos and then having found that category, we extrapolate from the information we already have and using this information as a base we form a conclusion that coincides with what makes sense to us, hence, we think spaceship or ufo.
Revelation 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.
But in this instance, spaceship is not what is depicted
And you do not recognise that the Jewish People have been and are being returned to Israel?
I have Christian Jewish friends who have made aliyah this year, and have been involved with many Christian groups who have aided Jews from all over the world to make return.
You speak as if Christ needed to do all those things in three years of ministry, but God has His own timetable, and as we near Christ's return, Christ's disciples have been completing His work on earth.
Actually the temple standing at that time was NOT the original temple, but one Herod built, but ignoring that, as stated to Jerami, Christ IS the temple and His body of believers are also the temple.
There will be a 'ruler' who rebuilds the Temple on the Mount, his name may be unknown, as we write, but we know he will actually be the Antichrist (as are all that speak against Christ called)and the Jewish people will hail him as their messiah, a false messiah who will bring peace, for about 3.5 years, before the wrath starts.
The the end will come, with Christ's return, and the prophesy of peace on earth will be fulfilled totally.
Again you try to impose time constraints upon God.
Have the Jews been busy these last two thousand years "bringing knowledge of God to the world" the answer is a flat NO, it is Christ's disciples who have diligently made the world aware of the bible, Gods word.
Yes when Christ returns EVERY knee shall bow and every tongue confess that He is Lord, and all the world will KNOW God
Which brings us back full circle.
The new covenant was ONLY required because in 'Jewish terms' the Jews refused to recognise Christ, and still do. Both of which were required to happen, and have happened.
If you reject Christ, as the Messiah, so be it, that is your will and right, but please recognise that those who KNOW Christ, and more importantly are known by Him, cannot agree with your viewpoint, which you base upon strict literal interpretation from a 'Jewish terms' understanding of the whole new covenant.
There is no need to discuss or debate these things, we only need to be assured whether God will and is recognising our relationship with Him, or not.
The history of the Jewish people from Christ to now does not truly support that claim, in my opinion.
My 'adoptive' mother was a Jewess, who was parachuted into Poland during the war, and was one of the first people into the camps when they were liberated, and went onward to be part of the foundation of Israel, a member of the Stern gang, who described Menachim Begin as a 'small runt of a lad who rode around Jerusalem on a bike with panniers full of explosives'.
I had a very Jewish upbringing, and was for a while an ardent Zionist, I still have friends who are active Zionists in Israel, and my sister, in the 60's was the woman who signed all the transit documents for the 'white goods' which were actually the armaments that provided victory in the 6 day war.
I am still very pro Jewish, but now from a believers stance.
שלום
John********************
There are still eleven (11) tribes scattered so what do you means Most Jews have returned?
I doubt you were raised Jewish, and as much anger as you feel toward me I also doubt you have Jewish friends. If you do they are Messianic Jews who believe as the Christians do.First, I have no anger at you whatsoever, why should I?
Secondly, you can doubt all you want as to my upbringing, granted Rose and her family were not devout Jews, more of the secular Israeli variety, but they kept kosher and raised their children in the faith.
Rose 'adopted' 'yoks' because after what she saw in WW2, she had this notion that by mixing we gentiles with her Jewish kids (and she ran a Jewish Youth Club for 20 or more years) she would stop the anti-Semitism that was still prevalent in the East End of London during the 50's and 60's.
She succeeded, though many Jewish parents objected to their children being subjected to gentile ways as we mingled together.
As for the 11 tribes still being 'out there' the figures show that in 1960 the population of Israel with 2.15m of which 1.91m were Jewish, by 2008 the population was 7.28m of which 5.5m were Jewish, so I think we can assume that there have been plenty of olim making aliyah.
Yes I have some Messianic Christian friends, I also have many Jewish friends who hold substantial positions and influence in Israeli Zionist society, as well as the normal selection of Jewish friends I have made over the last 45 years of mixing in Jewish culture and business.
I have never worked for a non Jewish company, when I was not self employed, as when I have needed employment (normally when something I was doing failed, was taken over or sold)it has been my Jewish friends who have rescued, employed or supported me.
I do not think you know me well enough to make such statements.***********
To the person I was replying to. Not to you.
Can't you see the post over my remark?
Click on the link below and see who I was speaking to.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/94016?p … ost2022739
I am tired of taking your hand and walking you around. Try reading the posts to get your answersAgain today is my sorry day. Sorry Ms Sexton.
************
If you don't mind, my name is Deborah not Deb. Even my family and friends don't call me Deb.
ThanksDear Deborah.
Just a reminder ! ???
I hope Joel is thinking about an answer to my question.
I would so much apreciate hearing a Hebrew "ish perspective on that matter.
Really.
Thank you (in advance)Jerami, what do you want to know? The Jewish interpretation? Who/what it is speak of?
What?I was asking about her/you, your perspective on the book of Daniel.
I understand chapters 2 and 7 as foretelling the four kingdoms to be given dominion over that Hebrew Nation which was scattered to the four winds between 135 and 138 BC.
Babylon, Persia, and Grecia being specifically called by name.
I am particually interested as to your view on the ninth chapter.
First, that The Commandment has gone forth
The Hebrew people were notified that they had 70 weeks to quit sinning, make restitution for their sins, and Anoint the Most high?
that it will be 69 weeks from the time the command went forth unto Messiah the Prince. ??? What does this mean.
And it will be 62 weeks and the Messiah will be cut off. ?? (Killed?)
I do not understand how Christians can come to the conclusions which they do, I'm curious as to what the Hebrew perspective is?
********
Only one comment...The new covenant was made before Christ as you call him so the non-belief of the Jews did not necessitate the new covenant.
According to scripture God sent Yahshua to the Jews.
Scripture says if you curse the Jews God will curse you. I think he cares about his elect and will not forsake them.*************
The Jews have not returned and according to scripture ALL WOULD RETURN during the time of the MESSIAH. That was 2000 years ago right?There really is no point to the jews returning now.
Why you ask
lol i would be happy to explain it.
There is only tribulation waiting there. Yes, the tribulation, the great tribulation that takes place at that place. Jews who go there, will face the great tribulation. Get your tickets now, lol.
Obviously, ALL the jews will return during the millennial kingdom.*******************
You love contradicting God. GOD said they would return and there would be peace for them.
You can laugh thinking about the Jews suffering, but God will fight for them.
Doi you really want to fight against God?God will fight for Israel it is true. The point is that first they have to repent. I do love Jews very much having many friends and I am member of friend of Israel. Book of 2 Chronicles said: if my people will humble themselves I will heal their land. People of Israel are now there and rest will follow. The problem is that many are not believers.
I wrote Hub about genealogy of Mary and Joseph. There are two fathers one is Jacob father of Joseph and other is Heli father of Mary. From legal purpose Joseph's family tree is there. But there is much more significant statement. In Joseph's tree there was wicked king Jeconiah, who was taken to Babylonian captivity. Prophet Jeremiah gave us God's message that descendants of Jeconiah (Coniah) [Mat 1:11-12] not king will come. The Messiah is King of kings and will sit on the throne of David. Therefore Family Tree of Joseph is not Jesus' family tree. This conflict means either Bible is wrong (it is impossible) or Joseph cannot be father of Jesus. Father of Jesus is G'd. Have a nice day.
http://hubpages.com/hubtool/edit/517507***********
It does not say Hali is the father of Mary. It says he is the father of Joseph. Don't change things so it will say what you want it to say.
The Jewish do not have to believe in Jesus, they do not have to believe Jesus is God and they do not have to believe in the trinity.
No Idols for the Jews.
The Gentiles such as you need to turn from your Idols.Deb, I have three fathers. One who begot me. Second father in Law. Thirdly Aba Father G'd. According to you then Joseph had two fathers. But only one Heli begot Mary and Jacob begot Joseph. Sorry for delay.
salathiel is the key to understanding the end of bloodline curse.
although its true jechoniah could not rule on the throne, God worked a way around it.
http://brotheryochanan.hubpages.com/hub … ction-here
it's explained here
You love contradicting God.
No, but keep up with the hostilities and i will enjoy contradicting you lol
GOD said they would return and there would be peace for them.
God also said there would be tribulation. Is there peace for the jews there now? I'll give you a minute to ponder that........... okay... the answer is no. Soooo when will there be peace for them? Take some more minutes.
You can laugh thinking about the Jews suffering, but God will fight for them.
Its opinions like this that really exercise my christ like attitude. Your assumption that i laugh about suffering of any kind is ill formed. I can't even pull the wings off a fly and i pick up worms off the sidewalk on rainy days when they are strugglin. I give most of my income to people in hardship situations without asking for it back. When they say, "i will pay you back." I stop them and say, "Let your nays be nay and yays be yays. Don't tell me, if you want to pay it back just do it, but don't promise something that might not and doesn't need to happen". So tell me what a bad person i am again rabbi. Show me some Jesus love. Be all critical because i take the time to inform you of context.************
When you said the Jews would go through tribulation, you added LOL so you were laughing and you wanted it known. Now don't come back and say I'm making it up.I said get your tickets now lol
context deborah, context*********
The things you say make you evil.
You're evil..simply evilplease stop whining because your doctrines make no sense and your self imposed wrong theories are way out there.
As a rabbi (lol) you should be open to all forms of instruction and learning but instead you turn a blind eye, a deaf ear and then call names.
I call this a hissy fit.
Your papers are bogus and your talismans have given you your personal demons, your practices do not bring you closer to God and you are lost and yes, evil.
All my posts are christian and God is well at the forefront.
When you have ears to hear, eyes to see, and want the truth more than a prosperous material life you will be shocked at how wrong you really are.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Christians believe that God came down to earth in human form, because Yahshua said: "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30). However, in Judaism, the fundamental idea is that God is not composed of matter, meaning God has no physical form. In Judaism, God is Eternal, above time, Infinite, beyond space. God cannot be born, and cannot die. Saying that G-d assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both God's Unity and Divinity. The Torah says: "God is not a mortal" (Numbers 23:19). Judaism says that the Messiah will be born of human parents, with normal physical attributes just like other people. He will not be a demigod, and will not possess supernatural qualities
Actually Yeshuvah was born only legally via birth canal, to be citizen of this earth. Judaism is religion but I believe the Bible.
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between you (Satan) and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. God and Moses (recorded) did not say He will be seed of Adam but woman. Man is carrier of blood and sin attached. It was first prophecy given to us by G'd about the Messiah.Well, God came to earth and made masterpiece Adam. He did put something from Himself (Ruah) and man became living soul. Adam was perfect and without sin. Then Adam sin and God must repeat Himself different way and gave us Last Adam, because He love us so much. He gave to us woman seed. Holy Ghost place the WORD - to the woman flesh, separated completely from Miriam's blood. Jesus had genetic makeup God's DNA. He was born of woman (legal reason) without sin (Adamic seed) without sin even genetic and the death could not kill Him. He died when He took sin of mankind and died but it was His choice. But death and Hell could not keep Him in... He rose from the death and is coming back again. Please read the Word He will appear in the cloud of God.
John 10:30 is not the only reason we believe that God came to earth.
There are probably 144+ different scriptures that point to God coming to earth in flesh.
I interpret john 10:30 as "the same" not as a "one".
echad in hebrew clearly means one malachi 1:10 for example.
in the greek one becomes unclear as many words mean one
James 2:10 hen is used where it obviously means a singular "one," "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all." clearly 'hen' means one in this example.
'heis, mia, hen' all can mean one but also mean other than one.
When the word one is used in the Greek, it will agree with the noun it modifies whether it is masculine, feminine or neuter. This usage is simple grammatical agreement and really gives us no clue as to how the word is being used.
Hence we must always be very careful when reading translated greek. Hebrew is not so unclear.brotheryochanan, you are in error. Hebrew Echad has two meanings: Numero one and unity. Example: Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one [ECHAD] flesh.
Saying that G-d assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both God's Unity and Divinity.
God doesn't care if you put the O in God or not. He is not that petty.
That was the very point of God being in the flesh. It does not make God small, neither does it diminish his divinity. God retained his divinity, obviously by controlling weather, reading minds, knowing where to be and whom to talk to. God being in the flesh makes God a willing partaker of our sufferings etc. God cannot be diminished by taking on a flesh husk, this is unreasonable thinking.
The Torah says: "God is not a mortal" (Numbers 23:19).
Back then he wasn't. But this scripture does not say that God could never be mortal it just says what God is not for the context of those scriptures. To infer that God could never become a man is to read what is not there.
Judaism says that the Messiah will be born of human parents, with normal physical attributes just like other people. He will not be a demigod, and will not possess supernatural qualities
So he will be less than some other prophets, like moses and elijah unable to perform a miracle, unable to read people's thoughts, unable to control weather? Wow now that's diminishing God and Gods powers. He will not come to heal the sick? How embarassing.
This is why judaism doesn't work, it limits God. It limits his forgiving ability, his miracle ability, his compassion, in fact, in every way it diminishes Gods attributes.***********
Those are your words not mine.
Again Yahshua was not God.@deborah jesus was god...bible says so..PERIOD..
************
No he isn't ...period
Where does it say that ...exactly
where
lol
and you tell us of the bible?Deb, you have to learn more. But anyway God loves you very much.
************
I know God loves me...but it is you who needs to learn.
I will never worship anyone but God. Jesus is not GodDeb, Yeshuvah is Son of Living G'd. Can you dictate to God He cannot have the Son? Yeshuvah is Last Adam. Is He not from family of God? BTW I pray according to Jesus instruction to Father in the name of Jesus.
******
What is your point?
Yahshua's name is not Jesus Christ.are you speaking English or not? Yeshuvah is Hebrew and Jesus is in English. You say often God but it is English. God in Hebrew is ELOHIM. Christ means in Greek anointed One, the Messiah.
I will suggest one thing. We all are waiting for the Messiah, why we don't pave His way to come - together? How he will look we'll see.*********
Names are not to be translated. No matter where I go, I am still Deborah.
Jesus is Latin and pronounced Hey-sus.
The name according to the New testament is extremely important.
It says: there is no other name by which we can be saved. That means using the correct name. Either you believe your bible or you don't.
It is you who needs to learn.
Acts 4:12
Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”
The thing is when people come to Christ they come because they realize that there is atonement for sin in the shed blood of Christ - that he died for them. And they realize their need for repentance - to turn their life around. It is later on through knowing the bible that persuasive evidence reveals that Jesus was more than just a person, instrumentally blessed of God to walk like a puppet and do all that God said to him. God in the flesh is revealed later.
***********************
Judaism doesn't work? you have no idea what you are talking about.
You think God lied when he said he would never forsake them? You seem to think all of Gods words in the Old Testament are irrelevant and you are so wrong actually you are blaspheming. You actually think you are saved....
You are told to pray for Israel so you better ask God to remove the hate for them from your heart.
If it wasn't for them you wouldn't know God existed.
Instead of hating them you need to thank them.
Genesis 12:3
And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Genesis 26:4
And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;
Genesis 28:14
And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.There you go jumping off the deep end again all angry and pointing fingers and judging people.
Of course God did not lie when he said he would never forsake them. Jesus said:
Matthew 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye (jews) shall not see me (jesus) henceforth, till ye shall say, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord."
forsaken no, but still dealing with, yes.
The jewish nation rejected him. How do you know i do not pray that the jews recognize Jesus for what he is? You don't know. I do, so thpppt!
You think i hate them. LOL. This is what the law does, it breeds a condemning spirit which is NOT the spirit of Jesus. Yet you say you follow him - you cannot follow him because you follow the law and this is what you become, finger pointy, quick to anger, hold grudges, got a bit of vengeance goin on, threatening to sue in court.
Lovely picture of Jesus, rabbi.
then you wield scripture like a sword and it does not even apply to me.
You need to grow in Jesus.****************************
Mad and pointing fingers?
You are speaking of me, but you are thinking of yourself.
If you thought you would not be caught, you would love to kill me.
Such LOVE*************
You are right, I do not follow Jesus. I never claimed too. There is no Hebrew named Jesus. There is only a Christian IDOL with that name.
You think you can be mean to those you want, but when I give some of your medicine back to you, you start saying I am not of God.
I show controlled anger. But if I did feel real anger, it would not be wrong, because I have a cause. You are trying to provoke me.
But at the same time it is OK for you to kill or steal because there is no law.
Make up your mind. Either there is a law or there isn'tYou are so over the place.
the laws (precept and statutes - not the midrash or talmud - the root of this word means, instruction, yara, G3384) are written in our hearts (jer 33:31)
and i have said that we have to align with Gods holiness so where do you get that i can steal and kill?
Mark 4:3 Hearken; Behold, there went out a sower to sow:
Mark 4:4 And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the fowls of the air came and devoured it up.
Mark 4:5 And some fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth; and immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of earth:
Mark 4:6 But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away.
Mark 4:7 And some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit.
Mark 4:8 And other fell on GOOD ground, and DID YIELD FRUIT that sprang up and increased; and brought forth, some thirty, and some sixty, and some an hundred. (these numbers do not apply to the law as the law requires 100%, so these must pertain to another Way)
Mark 4:9 And he said unto them, they that have ears to hear, let them hear.************
I know Hebrew, I've written hubs about it. You don't have to pretend you are teaching me or that you know it. You've read my hubs and you've learned a few things from it. But you still can't teach me. Here learn some more
Covenant in Hebrew is Beriyt and means an agreement that both sides are to keep or NONE have to.
Law in Hebrew is Torah and means the teachings of God given to his people in love to encourage them and make them strong
Commandment in Hebrew is Mitsvah and means direction and landmark so we can look to them as a guide.
I'm showing the contradictions of course for someone who learns slowly you would think I am all over the place.
Why are you passing over the contradictions?Hey I was reading your post and like what you have to say. I am a Christian, believe in God, love God, saved by Jesus. It means everything to me. I would have to think about these for a while and do some studying myself. I like what you have to say, because to me at least, this means that all God ever wanted was a relationship with me. And that the Law was put there, not to control me, but to guide and direct my life. As a Christian, to love God is to keep His commandments. This speaks of a mentality. There's either a God up there with a big stick ready to hit me, or a loving God who puts laws there to help me and to further His Gospel. However, I do think that loving God and others now supersedes whether or not I put on a tattoo. Thanks for this information. And to be honest...I think you would make a good Christian.
Just saying.what you miss, leave out and ignore is that Gods covenants or agreements were binding, ESPECIALLY, when signed in BLOOD - yes, the blood of Jesus. God signed his NEW covenant in blood. Just like moses law was signed in the blood of goats and sacrifice, so also was this NEW covenant.
You state that both sides are to keep or NONE have to So what you are empirically saying here is that Israel did not have to abide by the law of moses because they continually broke it and that this breaking annulled the covenant of God.
Did i read that correctly rabbi?
So many of your supposed contradictions have been shot down in flames and i supposedly am slow to learn
You need to grow in Jesus
I forgot to mention you can't have a death of the flesh on a cross or a resurrection without an earthly body.
Deborah Sexton wrote
There was never a second coming in any of the prophesies,
The New Testament is all messed up.
== -- == --
I do not come in arguement but for inquiry.
I have never read or heard how a Jewish person reasons, concerning the ninth chapter of Daniel. And would apreciate any insight which you might lend.
9:23 the commandment CAME FORTH
9:24 70 weeks are determined upon thy people
9:25 from the going forth of the commandment it shall be 69 weeks unto Messiah the prince.
9:26 After 62 weeks the Messiah shall be cut off.
It is my understanding that this 70 weeks began in 538 BC. ???
It would make sense to me, that this 70 weeks would have been finished before THAT Nation of Israel was scattered "to the four winds" by Herod around 135-138 AD. ???
This leads me to believe also that the 69 weeks and the 62 weeks also would have to have been fulfilled. ???
And if I am going to believe this! I have to attempt to understand other prophesy in such a way as to NOT CONTRADICT this train of thought. !!
This is the pivital point in which I disagree with "much" of the 20th centruy Christian theology.*********
This takes a lot of explaining and I don't feel like thinking at this time.
I will get back to you. I'll also have Joel explain it.
Remember in the Jewish religion there are the Orthodox and the Reformed.Just so happened to look in and see this post.
I understand ... and really will apreciate your take on this issue whenever you get a chance.
Also; is it politically correct to say Jewish people or is it more polite to say Hebrew ?***********
Jewish is more about ethnicity and religion. Not every Jew is Jewish.
Hebrew is probably better.
There are Jews that are atheists and don't like to be called Jewish.ethnicity and religion will not save anyone. The faith does.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
More contradictions
In Luke Mary and Joseph are traveling from their home in Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem in Judea for the birth of Jesus Luke 2:4.
Matthew, contradicts Luke, and says that it was only after the birth of Jesus that Mary and Joseph lived in Nazareth, and then only because they were afraid to return to Judea, Matthew 2:21-23.Matthew 2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Matthew does not mention where mary and joseph were before Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Matthew picks up after the birth and mentions nothing of before the birth.
Luke says they went to Bethlehem from Nazareth before the birth
This is not a contradiction but a augmentation.
Luke 2:4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
Luke goes on to say they brought the child to Jerusalem.
Luke 2:21 And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child...
Luke 2:22 And when the days of her purification... they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
(presumably for the passover)
Luke goes on to say the RETURNED to THEIR own city NAZARETH.
Luke 2:39 And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.
Matthew says that after the egypt ordeal Joseph and mary went to Nazareth.
Matthew 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.
Matthew includes the egypt deal and luke does not. Luke also does not include the herod shenanigan. Matthew is written to the jewish people and luke is writing to the greeks. Two different audiences each caring only for their own field of interests. Greeks like facts, Jews like history.
in
Luke 2:51 And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart.
Matthew agrees with Luke that Jesus lived in Nazareth.
How you got that "it was ONLY after the birth" is beyond me.
Although there is a certain condensation of the two accounts, the different aspects covered supplement each other but they do not contradict.*******************************
According to Matthew, they came and dwelt in A city called Nazareth (not their home, nor homeland). The only reason they stopped is because they were afraid to go on.
Stop trying to make right, what is wrong.
Matthew 2
22. But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:
23. And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene."being warned of God in a dream"
and your point was?
That joseph should not have been afraid?
Matthew 2:22 But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: NOTWITHSTANDING, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:
notwithstanding: (G1161 - but, and etc ) pick one.
Is it strange to you that God would tell a person to do one thing and then augment it later?
Moses was told to leave his home and land but not to go to a certain place.
Jeremiah was told he would be Gods spokesperson and then later that jeremiah would never marry.
Deborah, the Bible is not for to find contradictions. When I wrote the Book: Understanding Bible in 1990"s I made home work. I discovered an interesting point. Each author wrote what he perceived. They believe perhaps something differently, but it is fact we look for mind of God, His intent. He gave us freedom to express ourselves. The Bible is not scientific Greek type of book. It is mostly Jewish Book. Remember when God spoke when Jesus walked, the voice from heaven people heard differently, one hurt the voice of God, other thundering... See each had different perception, but it does not upset God. He is love.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Matthew claims this is a prophecy about Jesus
1. The virgin birth found in Isaiah 7:14
Isaiah 7:14 is part of a prophecy that Isaiah relates to King Ahaz regarding the fate of the two kings who were threatening Judah and the fate of Judah itself. In the original Hebrew, the verse says that a young woman will give birth, it does not say virgin The Hebrew words for young woman and virgin are entirely different words. It was called virgin when the Greeks translated it, but not before.
This has nothing to do with Yahshuayes almah is used (H5959 - damsel, maid, virgin)
Let us consider that almah means damsel or maid or young woman. As a jewish specialist you should know that virginity was considered much much more important than in our society today and that, In fact, women, all women, prior to marriage were supposed to be virgins, which means they had not had sex yet. So if you are implying that God chose a couple of fornicators well that would be mystifying.
Soooo, whether she was a maid, damsel or young woman this explicitly states that virginity was indeed the situation.
I agree that the initial prophecy of Isa 7:14 was applicable in that time frame. We must also note similarities: Neither named their child Immanuel, Immanuel was rather a surname if you will. Both Isaiah and Joseph were told by God specifically what names the children would be named:
Isaiah 8:3 Then said the LORD to me, “Call his NAME Maher-shalal-hash-baz.”
Matthew 1:21 "...and you shall call his name JESUS"
The interesting thing about this scripture and its pertinence to Jesus is the way Isaiah opens up:
Isaiah 7:13 And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David
God is not saying hear now Isaiah, but God is directing this prophecy to the House of David and God is saying to the House of David that there shall be a sign etc.
The house of David is plural as many are being referred to, lets look at the scripture again.
Isaiah 7:13 And he said, Hear YE now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for YOU to weary men, but will YE weary my God also?
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give YOU a sign; etc.
Ahaz clearly refused to ask for a sign and God turned his attention toward the whole house of David and vowed them a sign.
There is no clear definition of You being plural in english but simple grammatical agreement states that You is plural in this instance and therefore this simple statement has taken on a greater meaning. We have no reason to assume that the whole house of David was standing around but we do have indication that Ahaz was present.
I think Matthew knew his stuff to pick up on this.*******
It's the Hebrew language, it does not mean virgin. You can't even understand the meaning of English.*******
It's the Hebrew language, it does not mean virgin. You can't even understand the meaning of English.
And it wasn't Matthew who wrote it. Don't you get that?and you cannot read a post so let me highlight it for you:
Let us consider that almah means damsel or maid or young woman. you should know that virginity was considered much much more important than in our society today and that, In fact, women, all women, prior to marriage were supposed to be virgins, which means they had not had sex yet. So if you are implying that God chose a couple of fornicators well that would be mystifying.
Soooo, whether she was a maid, damsel or young woman this explicitly states that virginity was indeed the situation.
As to who wrote what I am sure i will enter into that arena with you based on your past foibles.
Deborah, it is not at all about virginity it is all about man transmitting with sperm genetic makeup - blood of Adamic sin. Then the Messiah would be mortal. The mortal Messiah will be for nothing. Mortal man cannot save anyone. Mortal man cannot take sin of others on himself or take the curse of the Law. Please read Isaiah 53. Mortal man born of sin cannot help anyone eternally.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
The Last Chapter in Revelations says blessed are they that do his commandments
14. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
15. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
The commandments are to be kept in order to have a right to the Tree of Life (ETERNAL LIFE)commandments
are you saying this word 'commandments' are the Law and if you are saying the Law please define the Law that you speak of; is it the law of Moses only, is it the talmud and/or mishnah? Is it just the 10 commandments? or all of the above.
Sorry, i know how you dislike multiple choice lists*********
What do you think the Talmud is? It is the Jewish bible and what you call the Old Testament. SadJust answer the question
what are jesus commandments
Marvel not that Jesus has commandments
besides how can you quote from revelation? Its all about Jesus!
Revelation 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.
ooooooh he has a book too*********************
At least you didn't answer this..right or wrong. That should have said "Is it" not "It is"
I don't read much commentary, I read the scriptures. Why do you think I need other people's interpretations and explanations?You certainly need something.
Since you are reading the scriptures and getting all this stuff wrong and misinterpreting and ignoring much of it, it would do you well to learn something, because, quite frankly, well never mind.
and you still did not answer the question
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
This is for Vladimir Uhriand & others who think they know the truth.
http://deborah-sexton.hubpages.com/hub/ … I-Divinity
The functions of our minds are limited and we see everything in dualities. If we think of up we automatically think of down and bring separation to both directions in our own mind.
Because Divinity, has to be beyond all limitations, Divinity is not and cannot be dual in nature. If we say Divinity is male then we are also saying that Divinity is not female and we are placing limits on it.
Divinity is complete unity, with no duality. Because we have limited minds, Divinity cannot be like anything we know.
In fact, the ultimate speculation we can make about the nature of Divinity is that Divinity is NO-THING which we can know.
God is Divine and therefore can only be one, not two or three... - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Contradiction
"In Matthew it says Mary, Joseph and Jesus flee to Egypt to escape Herod, and that the return of Jesus from Egypt was in fulfillment of prophecy, Matthew 2:15. But, Matthew talks only about the second half of Hosea 11:1. The first half of the verse makes it clear that the verse refers to God calling the Israelites out of Egypt in the exodus led by Moses, and has nothing to do with Jesus.
Paul is one that did this with scripture many times. He took parts and made them say what he wanted them to.
Matthew 2:15. And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.
What it really says
Hosea 11:1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt
This is one reason we cannot disregard the Jewish Bible (OT)"Hosea 11:1 When ISRAEL was a child, then I loved him, and called my SON out of EGYPT.
As we recall Matthew covers Mary, Joseph and Jesus sojourning in Egypt.
Matthew now reinforces that Egyptian sojourn with Hosea 11:1. This would remind the Jews of all the other patriarchs that spent time in Egypt and we can clearly see that Jesus also, like the others, spent time in Egypt, causing his Jewish readers to see that this pattern is not lost concerning Jesus.
Is this is a prophecy? I think not but merely a statement. Yes God called his son out of Egypt, Yes Jesus is called the son of God. Moses and others were called out of Egypt. It is a good parallel and would fulfill its job of reminding his audience that Jesus was called out of Egypt like other great people of God before him.
But an actual messianic prophecy I am unsure. It was spoken by a prophet and in whatever tense is fulfilled by the family of Jesus (jesus being God's SON) residing in Egypt and then being called out from Egypt.
Soooo since Matthew is so right on the mark in all else he says i choose not to dispute this as being prophecy but i do consider it to be fulfilled, either way.
You want to hang Matthew for this?
In the instance of the manna falling from heaven in the desert and feeding the Hebrews, Jesus says in john 6:31-36
John 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that comes to me shall never hunger; and he that believes on me shall never thirst.
Was the manna in the desert a prophecy? NO, but what it was is a type and shadow or an illustration.
So while some people want to say that Matthew claims Hosea 11:1 as a prophecy, i rather say that it was a type and shadow which means that it pertains to Jesus but not in the prophetical way but rather by illustration.
And the illustrative purpose of Matthew citing Hosea was to bring to remembrance others who also came out of Egypt.
This is history and Matthews audience would be interested in this but Luke's audience would not, being Greek.
safe to assume:
NO contradiction
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
"To prove that the slaughter and the flight into Egypt never happened, Just compare what Matthew and Luke says about what happened between the time of Jesus' birth and the family's arrival in Nazareth.
In Luke, it says forty days after Jesus was born, his parents brought him to the temple, offered the sacrifice, and returned to Nazareth.
At the same time Matthew somehow adds in: the visit of the Magi to Herod, the slaughter of the innocents and the flight into Egypt, the short stay in Egypt, and the return from Egypt. All of these things must occur in the forty day period because Matthew says the Magi visited Jesus in Bethlehem before the slaughter of the innocents.
Because the original prophecies are not about Jesus,
this means whoever wrote Matthew searched the OT for any prophecy that would look like prophecies of Jesus" - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Contradiction
“Whoever wrote Matthew 21:1-7 tried to make Jesus fulfill a prophecy, but he misunderstood what it said.
The prophecy is from Zechariah 9:9 which says
“Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. ”
If you know anything about the Hebrew in the Jewish Bible (OT) than you would know that the word translated "and" used here, does not mean another animal but is used in the sense of "even"
Which means the ass is a colt (young male) and a foal.
In Matthew 21 they have Jesus riding two different animals , a donkey and a colt, and it looks like at the same time.” - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Contradiction
In Luke 1:44 it says that John and Jesus was in their mother’s womb at the same time. While in the womb John knew Jesus was around him, and leaped for joy.
In John 1:29,36 As adults while John is baptizing, he says that Jesus is "the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world", and "the Son of God"
But, in Luke 7:18-23 when John is thrown in prison from which he does not return alive. John's knowledge of Jesus as the son of God and saviour of the world is contradicted because John sends two of his disciples to ask Jesus, "Are you the one who is coming, or do we look for someone else?"So John while in jail has no human tendencies to wonder what is going on outside of his jail cell.
You may well consider this to be a flaw of John but i do not.
In jail time is very long and with nothing to do, one thinks about all sorts of things. So he asked his disciples to get the matter straight from the source. Its kind of like John wanted to read the headlines of the newspaper so he sent his disciples to inquire whatsup.
Nothing wrong with that, except that its harmless and your interpretation.***********
Gee, don't you understand English?**********
What are you talking about?
I'm amazed at how you miss the subject, theme, plot of everything you read.
What has your reply have anything to do with what I said?
Now make something up.**********
What are you talking about?
I'm amazed at how you miss the meaning, subject, theme, plot of everything you read.
What has your reply have to do with what I said? LOL
Now make something up.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
**********
Contradiction
Luke 3:20-22 gives the impression that John did not baptize Jesus. Luke says that Jesus’ baptism took place after John was imprisoned. But John never returned alive.Luke 3:20 Added yet this above all, that he shut up John in prison.
Luke 3:21 Now when all# the people were baptized (by John), it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized (past tense), and praying, the heaven was opened,
#all G537 hapas (emphatic accusative - absolutely all, everyone, whole)
meaning when johns mission was done.
So we could read this as being: so when johns mission was done (all the people were baptized) it came to pass - which is not quite what the interlinear says - Jesus being baptized (which is past tense) etc...
There is really no clear misrepresentation here. If you perceive it to be such well, then we can go to other scripture to clear up that only a dummy would infer that jesus was baptized after john was in prison.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
You might want to look this up. For Sure Mithraism,
By. Paul Carlson
The Lord's supper was not invented by Paul, but was borrowed by him from Mithraism, the mystery religion that existed long before Christianity and was Christianity's chief competitor up until the time of Constantine. In Mithraism, the central figure is the mythical Mithras, who died for the sins of mankind and was resurrected. Believers in Mithras were rewarded with eternal life. Part of the Mithraic communion liturgy included the words, "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made one with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."[*].
The early Church Fathers Justin Martyr and Tertullian tried to say that Mithraism copied the Lord's Supper from Christianity, but they were forced to say that demons had copied it since only demons could copy an event in advance of its happening! They could not say that the followers of Mithras had copied it - it was a known fact that Mithraism had included the ritual a long time before Christ was born.
Where did Mithraism come from? The ancient historian Plutarch mentioned Mithraism in connection with the pirates of Cilicia in Asia Minor encountering the Roman general Pompey in 67 BC. More recently, in 1989 Mithraic scholar David Ulansey wrote a book, The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries, in which he convincingly shows that Mithraism originated in the city of Tarsus in Cilicia. That this is also the home town of the apostle Paul cannot be a coincidence.
Paul admits that he did not know Jesus during Jesus' lifetime. He also says that his gospel was not taught to him by any man (Galatians 1:11-12). All of Paul's theology is based on his own revelations, or visions. Like dreams, visions or hallucinations do not come from nowhere, but reveal what is already in a person's subconscious.
It is very likely that the source of most of Paul's visions, and therefore most of his theology, is to be found in Mithraism. That we find Jesus at the Last Supper saying more or less the same thing Paul said to the Corinthians many years later is another example of the church modifying the gospels to incorporate the theology of Paul, which eventually won out over the theology of Jesus' original disciples.No one knows the precise origins of the cult devoted to the Persian deity Mithras, which came to be known as the Mithraic mysteries or Mithraism. Plutarch says only that the Cilician pirates “offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been performed to our own time [i.e., the second century A.D., roughly two centuries after Pompey’s time], having received their previous institution from them.” It is also possible that the mysteries of Mithras, like certain other mystery cults in Roman dominions, were popularized by the mysterious “Chaldeans,” itinerant sorcerers from the East who were periodically expelled from Roman territory for encouraging the formation of subversive cultic secret societies.
The name of Mithras is the Latinized equivalent of Mithra, an important deity in Persian Zoroastrianism
We do know that it was a secret religious society to which only men were admitted, but it was military.
more here: http://thenewamerican.com/history/world … -of-empire
Mithra and Jesus
Mithra was born out of a rock, so unless this rock is a virgin there is no parallel there and certainly jesus birth was very much different.
MIthras sacrifced himself for world peace - Mainly mithras killed a bull. There is no textual evidence of the death of mithras so a resurrection can only be inferred. Some mithrians claim that he rose after three days but again there is no textual documentation for that.
The dating for mithras is after christianity. Sure it had some foundation before christianity, but obscurely, it 'blossomed' around 150ad approx, well after Christianity.
Cumont has been negated by much study and research of able men.
MIthra has its roots in persian Zoroastrianism.
Some people will grasp at any and all straws to support their viewpoints. I can cite mine and more but why bother since someone will come along and say "how can u post that rubbish". lol.
Clearly christianity flows off the back of the jewish religion forceably so, with Jesus whom being sent to the Jews, citing Moses, noah, etc and giving valuable insight into the kingdom of God, dying and being resurrected - not reincarnated.***************************************
Of course they know where it came from.
By P. Carlson
Where did Mithraism come from? The ancient historian Plutarch mentioned Mithraism in connection with the pirates of Cilicia in Asia Minor encountering the Roman general Pompey in 67 BC. More recently, in 1989 Mithraic scholar David Ulansey wrote a book, The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries, in which he convincingly shows that Mithraism originated in the city of Tarsus in Cilicia. That this is also the home town of the apostle Paul cannot be a coincidence.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
**********
Mithraism is a Roman mystery religion that flourished in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD. Much is still unknown about this secretive sect, but scholars have generally been able to determine that it involved the worship of the ancient Persian god Mithras in caves, a communal meal and initiation through seven stages of an astrologically-themed hierarchy.
It's Roman, Paul was Roman.Common meals are found in almost all religions.
Clearly the meal of the christian was founded on the passover.___________
I am not speaking of the Jews passover. I am speaking of Paul.
The Mithras also had a God who came down as a man. He died for his people and ascended back to become God again.((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Oh, you think if you say it than it’s true.
Better do some reading and learn.
http://jdstone.org/cr/files/mithraschristianity.html
http://www.innvista.com/culture/religio … mithra.htm
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi/deadange … ithra.html
http://www.hermeticmagick.com/content/d … thras.html
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/mom/mom07.htm
http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm
Need More?link one
Library of the World’s Myths and Legends (Persian Mythology); Stories of the Bible on TV – Historians; J.M.Robertson, T.W.Doane, F.Cument, J.G.Frazer; The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries by David Ulansey
F. Cument as i stated has been disproved. Persian mythology is just that MYTHOLOGY. Much of this "evidence" is speculation not from textual evidence (as their is none, it was a mystery religion - hence cumonts disproval) And most of it comes from the latter 2nd century
You need to read the link again and look at the source and the time period, but nothing here speaks of any reality.
IF you want to any of this as evidence against christianity you are deceived.
As far as acharya s goes http://www.tektonics.org/af/achy01.html
As far as the pyramid texts go: http://www.pyramidtextsonline.com/translation.html.
As far as all these mystic references, well you know where i stand with mysticism.
We can all find these kind of sites, but really, can you not notice sensationalism when you see it. In order to get books published some authors present some new thing, even if it has to be made up.
So no i don't want anymore. Just go to a credible site and find the truth for yourself.
Deborah Sexton
Covenant in Hebrew is Beriyt and means an agreement that both sides are to keep or NONE have to.
= - = -
ME
They teach in the Christian churches that this is what it is talking about in Daniel 9:24.
That the Lord was giving the Hebrew peoples notice, that if they did not quit sinning, and make restitution for their sins , And anoint the most Holy; which they didn't do. OR the covenant will be broken.
What the Christian Church wants to do is to ignore the fact that All of the prophesy written in the book of Daniel were talking about Four kingdoms beginning with Babylon, which will have dominion over that Hebrew Nation.
The Angel interprets that the fourth Beast IS the Fourth Kingdom to have dominion over "That" Hebrew Nation which was scattered across the rest of the Roman Empire.
The little horn which replaces three of the ten horns is interpreted by the angel as being a king which replaces three kings after the first ten.
In other words, the 14th emperor of the Roman Empire.
Hadrian was the fourteenth and last Emperor of Rome to rule over this Hebrew Nation. He died in 138 AD
Daniel 12:7 "It shall be for a time, times and an half ... and when he has accomplished to scatter the power of the Holy People, all of THESE things shall be finished."
They shall be scattered for a time, times and an half.
A time times and an half is equal to approx 1648 of our years, which began in 138 AD and ended around the beginning of the 1800's.
Hebrews began migrating back to the holy land in mass numbers.
The 1290 days mentioned in 12:11 ended around 1844 when the Caliphate signed a decree allowing Hebrews entrance into the cities in Israel.
The 1335 days ended around 1890 something.
These numbers are correct "IF" Jesus was the messiah, and If the 62 weeks began in 538 BC.
Sixty two weeks would be equal to approx 568 of our years.
And if none of this is true I might as well throw my bible away and become an atheist because the bible will make no sense to me at all.
For me, the book of Daniel is ground zero for any understanding that I can derive from scripture.
And when carrying this concept into the book of Revelation, all the pieces begin to fall together.
From A to Z it makes sense to me .... and nobody can take that away from me.chill guys ...it is like whos more powerful spiderman or superman...calm down...ancient writers used to creativity ...thats it...no need to debate so much on fictions...
It think Paul Washer is trying to make people realize that to be saved, doesn't mean you do whatever you want. But that you are indeed changed and now your desire's are different. He is pushing back the mentality behind "once saved always saved" that says, do what you want...go to heaven anyways. However, John says that if we love Him we keep His commandments. We are called and made to/for good works. However, a prayer in faith will always be heard and answered. God is working in our generation!
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Contradiction
1. Mark 15:7 and Luke 23:19 say that Barabbas was guilty of violent uprising and murder.
2. John 18:40 says that Barabbas was a robber.Mark 15:7
Them that had made insurrection with him (συστασιαστῶν)
Fellow-rioters. But the better texts read στασιαστῶν, rioters, omitting the σύν, with (fellow)
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
There was a man named Barabbas in prison. He was with some rebels who had committed murder during a riot.
insurrection is a riot, a riotous act. We see acts of riot today, after hockey game, windows are smashed, looting occurs. Okay probably this act of Barabbas was not over a hockey games it was probably in protest against the government. Much like we have today. Rome would have been very upset with riots about their government, we have the Maccabees warring with Rome for example. So suppose there was someone murdered. Today we would go through huge lengths and sifting of evidence to find the correct person for the murder, but, what if, in those days to set an example or in effort to stamp out other riots, protests, sedition the govie at that time thought that making an example out of this man would be a sign to others (including the real murderer and maybe the real killer would step forward [viable since they lacked the technology we use today for evidence gathering]) that Rome was not fooling around with this type of behavior, so they charged him with sedition and murder. He may well have been innocent of murder as there is some room for definition that in the reading, Barabbas may not have been the one who murdered but of that same group. Perhaps this is like gang murders where they catch one member and charge him for the actions of the others - either hoping the real perpetrator will step forward or to warn the others.
in either case we have, once again, sedition or rioting which of course may include looting which all 3 mention that Barabbas stole something. John may not have been convinced, being a Jew and perhaps knowing how the roman empire worked that Barabbas actually murdered someone.
Again it is a matter of your seeing contradiction which is not contradiction.
The 3 agree technically agree.Sir, an insurrection is a violent uprising against authority figures, the government etc. Nonetheless. It says he was a robber in another place.
Do you think you can cover up the truth in many words?This is not a cover up. It is allowable marginability.
As i have stated remains and further, this barabbas incident is not a foundational doctrine, it is not even a doctrine. So whether you want to allow for this riot as not being an occasion to loot or not, Christianity is not at all affected by it. On a scale of one to 10 for importance, it is generously placed at one.
If we look at all places where the bible holds true to all these other supposed contradictions we see the bible at 99.9%.
So what really is your point?
Is it that christianity is wrong because barabbas was a seditious killer and not a robber? or is it just to back up your wifes outrageous claims?**************************
Who said it was a doctrine?
It is a contradiction.
Can't you understand anything?
No wonder you go to websites to see what you believe. You need someone else to teach you what to believe.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Crucified Between Who?
Matthew 27:38 and Mark 15:27 say that Jesus was crucified between two robbers , Luke just calls them criminals, John just calls them men. It is a well know historical fact that crucifixion was reserved for violent uprisings against authorities and slaves that rebelled. The Romans did not crucify robbers.jewish virtual library
Crucifixion was the standard Roman mode of execution for non-Roman criminals and enemies of the state
Josephus reports many incidents of crucifixion: Antiochus IV crucified Jews in Jerusalem who would not relinquish their faith (Ant., 12:256). Two thousand rebels were crucified by Quintilius Varus (Ant., 17:295). Tiberius Julius Alexander ordered two rebels, sons of *Judah the Galilean, to be crucified (Ant., 20:102). Seven years later (about 52 C.E.) there was another wholesale crucifixion of zealots at the hand of Quadratus (Wars, 2:241); Felix crucified not only zealots and rebels, but also citizens suspected of collaborating with them (Wars, 2:253). Florus had Jewish judges tortured and crucified before his eyes (Wars, 2:306–8). When Jerusalem was besieged, Titus ordered all Jewish prisoners of war to be crucified on the walls of the city and there were as many as 500 crucifixions a day (Wars, 5:449–51).
Romans did whatever they wanted to do concerning crucifixion, well, concernng death, many were nuts and exceptionally bloodthirsty. Perhaps putting jesus between two common criminals was like adding a reproach upon another reproach. Perhaps using law breakers of higher status would have elevated Jesus inbetween the two in the eyes of the audience.
Its nice that you think you know what is going on in this scenario, like some mindreader, but you don't.
It might be a criteria of embarassment to hang between two lesser or common criminals and if the gospel writers wanted to elevate christs postion in the crucifixion they may have said sedationist or insurrectionists instead of robbers, but as with the gospel, truth is top of the list no matter how it represents. Holla!
I see no problem here
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
The Empty Tomb
Matthew 28:1, says only Mary Magdalene and the other Mary found the tomb empty.
Mark 16:1 says it was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome.
Luke 23:55, 24:1 and 24:10, sats the women who had come with him out of Galilee, who were Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James. Luke 24:10 says that there were at least two others.
John 20:1-4 says Mary Magdalene was alone when she went to the tomb, saw the stone removed, than went to find Peter. John states that Peter, another disciple and she, returned to the tomb.
My dear you need to know the definition of contradiction.
Matthew says mary magdalene was at the tomb
Mark says mary magdalene was NOT at the tomb = contradiction
What we have are supplements.
The gospels do not disagree but they agree.
They do not mention all the mary's that showed up in each gospel and neither does salome get repeated - most likely because she is already listed as being there - but luke notices joanna is not mentioned and mentions her. Mary magdalene repeated would have been a 'heads up' as she was well known for her actions concerning jesus and seemingly is the only one John is concerned about and to derive that John states implicitly that ONLY mary was there is as usual with your ability to deceive people - john does not say ONLY but he says mary was there EARLY. John does not have to mention (again) all the other mary's because they are already mentioned and we see that John does not care much for repeating what the three witnesses have already covered - as is his style throughout his gospel.
The mary's that were there are covered in different gospels and in other gospels we see more women. This is not a contradiction.
I have 10 marbles in my drawer and someone asks me if have a marble in my drawer, i say yes, someone else asks do i have 6 marbles in my drawer i answer yes. Did i contradict? NO. Is my answer false? NO. Someone else to looked into my drawer says i have a "steely" and reports that i have a steely. Does that contradict? AGAIN NO, it SUPPLEMENTS.
It is also criteria of embarrassment to make mention that women - as we know their testimony is not worthwhile in those days, but as truth dictates, the women were there and are mentioned.
Instead of just announcing your perceived mistruths as some sort of fact, and unresearched assumptions or cutting and pasting from your favorite atheist site.. I would humbly like to suggest you do some actual research before wasting any more time with my giving you Christianity 101 lessons.
and please also check the definitions for supplement and augment.This is not a supplement, It's a contradiction.
John 20:1-4 says Mary Magdalene was alone when she went to the tomb, saw the stone removed, than went to find Peter. John states that Peter, another disciple and she, returned to the tomb.If one reads it more carefully verse 2 says: and WE know not where....
WE
as i said before, it does not matter that john mention all the women but the we should be I IF mary were alone.ליואל שלום.
מה נשמע?
אני רוצה לדעת מאיפה אתה בארץ.
gam meod meani'en li eize daat ata? batuach she daat shelhca lo ehudi. mi atem????
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Christian's Fake separation of The Law
The Christians try to get around things by artificially separating the Mosaic Law into the ceremonial law and the moral law. This separation would have disgusted the Jews of Yahshua's time
They can get around it in their own minds, but not around God.lol
We don't at all
We let God teach us what he wants while we are eating lovely prawns and ya know what, he has never put me or others that i know in the penalty box for eating food.
He is not that petty.
all that was type and shadow that all may learn by it but when the time comes for a NEW dispensation they should not adhere to it.
As i have said, there are levels to holiness that you are not even aware of because the law is set, its written. God deals with the hearts of people now and in that way, God is not limited, he can deal with the root of the problems instead of worrying about what kind of sea food we are eating or how far we are walking on a sabbath.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
For Mr. Yochanan
Somewhere around here you said I don't understand Greek or Hebrew, and insinuated you do.
I asked you before to do this and you ignored it.
Here are simple sentences 2 each of Hebrew and Greek.
What do they say?
1. poso kostizi afto?
2. milas anglika? milas iglezika?
1. Rak rega bevakasha!
2. Kama ze ole?***********
Mr. Yochanan
Interpret the above sentences, please.Deborah, there are many good books on the subject. We have:
Strongs concordance
interlinear
One does not need to 'know' greek to have access to it's definition, tense, use, voice, or other grammatical points. In fact it is easy, if not easier to use these resources without wasting so much time trying to educate oneself with some courses.
Now if you think you have a kudos here, whatever you know or think you know or however low your marks were; why do i keep making your claims to contradictions look like foolish endevours?
How many people really understand the english language? being born english.
I know another person who can read hebrew and he isn't any wiser in the scriptures than anybody else. The scriptures as we know are opened by God to his believers and that i can back up with scripture. God never tells us to go and study greek - kudos to those that do - but concerning the scriptures leaning on ones understanding, education or diplomas is not a key to success. God will reveal his word to whom he will and no one needs to graduate greek school to know what God wants them to know.
So the point you are trying to make come across sort of like this:
deborah, go read english and tell me what is the meaning of:
John 5:8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.
John 5:9 And immediately the man was made whole, and took up his bed, and walked: and on the same day was the sabbath.
Lets see if your Greek can help you now?
Besides i think you spelt the Greek wrongHello to all. I've just stopped by by a mere chance and I can't make two ends meet in what you are talking about, but all of you are expressing your opinions which have nothing in common with Jewish (Hebrew) side.
Anyway, I do not know translation of the first 1. and 2.(1. poso kostizi afto? 2. milas anglika? milas iglezika?), but as a Hebrew speaking person, I know what other 1. and 2. mean
and they mean 
well, they mean 
they just mean:
1. Rak rega bevakasha!- Just a moment please!
and
2. Kama ze ole?- How much does it cost?
how this type of knowledge would help in understanding of the TANACH?
Also, if you want to know real Jewish (Hebrew) side, check the thread http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/88859***********************
The ones you can't read is Greek.
It has nothing to do with the understanding of the Tenakh.
He said My Hebrew and Greek were bad. And acted like he knew the two languages. I gave him some simple things to read and he couldn't.
I doubt I am wrong about my Jewish religion and my husband's ethnicity (my husbands religion too)
When I was studying in Savyon to get my certificate of semichah, I, as everyone, had to prove I understood the Jewish Bible & religion. So whenever someone tells me I am wrong, it makes me think either they are wrong or of a different religion.
You've never said that to me before. Where do you feel I am wrong?
DeborahDeborah, I never sided with you in your religious polemics. We were on the same page only on political forums, where you stood up with me for Israel, for its rights and where we together tried to show the truth vs. lies of mass media.
However, regarding your religious posts I am not with you at all. More even, I cannot understand your denomination. Though you constantly repeat that you express Jewish point of you, it is cannot be further away from Jewish. Jewish person would never use KJV as a source, would never even consider Jesus as their anything. But it is ok with me, if you have your own side. Just do not mislead other people that it is Jewish side. I have no idea what kind of study and in what group you went over in Savyon. Can you give me a name or a link to this group?
As a side note- on one of the forums I addressed you in Hebrew in my post, but you did not understand it. So, I am really in doubt now...***************************
I don't believe in the KJV but Christians do. I want to show them to bring them out. You have to sweep & clean, before you can bring in something new. If you don't see that..pray about it.
I do not go with the crowd, I do things on my own and I am Jewish by religion.& more
Most people who have been in the KJV has a hard time letting go..until they see the truth about it. In order to show them truth, the KJV has to be used since that is all they believe.
I felt that I should do that.
I don't care if you don't agree with me...it just doesn't matter. I have never said you were on my side..as long as God knows what I am doing..that's all that matters.
Good day...
I have been in need of spiritual guidance and looking for a religion to follow, but after watching an hour of this narcissistic a-hole and all the comments to follow I think I will just become an atheist and try to make the world a better place. Seriously. I can't believe people are listening to this guy, he is obviously suffering from several personality disorders. I thought Christianity was all about love and forgiveness and stuff like that, but I guess I was wrong, this Washer guy showed me what it was all about.
*************
Well you don't disregard God because of people.
There are more religions and you don't have to settle on Christianity. As a matter of fact I advise you not to even consider it.There are many good churches beside boring kind. Deborah suggested that if someone has the family should not associate with them. People of many churches are one family. It is best way to exercise love. Deborah has really strange recommendations.
&CM Sullivan. Yes Christianity is about love, forgiveness and Grace, but also seeking for the truth. The truth shall set one free. Not all call Christians by name are Christians. On the first place being in relationship with God is the faith. It is only connector with the Lord. Many practice constantly doubt. Being new creation is wonderful thing.
God bless.
- brotheryochananposted 13 years ago0
Did you not criticize me for saying "lets hijack this thread" a while ago?
Are you not off topic with all these supposed contradictions
open another thread deborah so all can see these contradictions but lets get back to topic*********
No, it is about a shocking message.
Nothing more shocking than the English bible being fake.
And you're going around the sentences above that I asked you to interpret.I know, i got carried away because of easy refutability.
You're still zero for, umm, I lost count.LOL you haven't refuted one thing Deborah has proven in the very word you say you believe in.
Deborah, I am using Jewish JPS Bible - JPS Hebrew English Tanakh. The purpose of my comment is that many Jewish people claim that Jewish understanding Bible is better than Christians. Yes they know Hebrew language but there is question about understanding. Example: Genesis 1:2 translating word Ruah as wind. We translate as Spirit of God hovering over the waters. Jewish Bible translated "wind sweeping over the waters". This text is about the creation, not physical manifestation of wind. I would prefer to use Spirit of God... But translators on purpose showing there is no Holy Spirit... It would be strainge if we would translate all Ruah as a "wind".
Like I will give them one heart and “new wind” withing you? Where Bible ever said man had old wind inside before? See Ezekiel 11:19 And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit (ruah) within you… We see now Jewish Bible translated this Ezekiel text rightly, they did not have other choice. Then why double minded? It is on purpose creating confusion. The Ezechiel predicted there will be new inner man, will have new heart, new spirit as we understand it being born again.*************************
I also use the JPS and the Greek bible (the blue letter and the Septuagint) and I know all the things you said. You don't have to teach me. Under answers you will find I explained about the wind being the Holy/Sacred Spirit.
But I am using KJV to tear down wrong beliefs because that is the one they use.
The JPS will come later.
If you don't mind..don't criticize me for what I have chosen to do. Just keep yourself right.
ThanksOK, thanks, Deborah. True, I do not have right to teach anyone. Sorry.
you keep yourself right.
you never addressed his post.
don't apologize vladimir, its beneath you to stoop to this deceiver
*********
You're the one replying to my posts more than anyone. You get back on topic and leave me alone.
Dear Mr. chanan
I pray that some day soon you can see yourself from a unbiast prospective.
As we nall need to do.
There is a thin line between excelence and N.W.A.S.
And unless someone that loves us tells us when we are about cross that line; we will never see it in our own judgment of ourselves.
Somebody that loves YA is telling you now.
I think you are straddling the line.
Why are you hounding Debra so relentlesly?
You have past the point of converting her long ago; don't YA know?
You do know that you are kicking a dead cat, I know you do!
So why do you keep doing it?
You are not sending the message you think you are!
Everybody else sees it differently than you think they do, I think!
No offence Debra; I'm not calling you a dead cat.
Everybody seems to spend a lot of time argueing the little stuff, loosing sight of the things which really matter.
But in the end, I hope that doesn't matter.
I am coming to believe that it really doesn't.
In the end , we will discover what we have really done.
And Jesus wept!Dear brotheryochanan;
i just now had a thought; not my first one mind you! Ha! = (LOL)
I invite you to a healthy discussion concerning end time prophesy, as stated by Jesus Christ AND through the revelation ordained by yours and my God which also spoke to Daniel through visions which was then interpreted by his angel Gabriel delivered to Gods servant Daniel.
Do ya feel up to it? I think it is worth discussing! What Ya think?
I admit that I am old and slow, and too bling to type very fast; and am unable to sit in this chair for very many hours; which gives you lots of time to think about your next responce.
SO this might take some time.
???????????It is 2:38 in the AM. I'm going to sleep now.
i hope I hear something by in the morning,
I'm not ready, yet , I think I don't need to be.
Lets talk about it ???
- Hubert Williamsposted 13 years ago0
I have finished listening to the video of Paul Washer. Right off the top I do not follow a denomination. I do not allow man or woman to tell me that, if I do not follow his or her interpretation of the Bible I will burn in hell. I believe that Jesus is my personal savior because I personally invited him into my heart. At my baptism, although others were present and the preacher put my head below the water, there was nobody under that baptismal pool but Jesus Christ and me. At that time, I received his spirit and accepted his sacrifice. Although that water was cold, I felt the warmth of Jesus' love wrap around me and knew that Jesus' love and protection would always be there giving me strength.
I am human; when my strength weakens, his strength pulls me out of the dark. I am not a public prayer. To judge others for their belief is not my right. That right belongs solely to God. Because I am human; I abhor the concept of terror in the name of religion. Religion is not my Savior, Jesus is. The Baptists, Catholics, Muslims, Mormons or any other of the denominations are not my Savior, Jesus is. Jesus is my guide through life, not Paul Washer or any other preacher, they are only human like me. Jesus is involved in all decisions in my life. As a human, I sometimes do not take his advice, he does not yell at me as a preacher would. He accepts that I am human, forgives me and helps me walk over the rough sea that I created. Jesus tells me that the only way to heaven is through him. I have yet to receive any amendments to that arrangement.Hubert I love your testimony. It is cool. Judging is of the law. But we are free and the joy from it.
Of course I understand what is brother Washer is trying to say to youth. It is better to learn how to walk in the spirit and many troubles will be solved by it.Walking in the spirit is one thing. Following a human, such as Mr Washer, blindly and accepting his word as the only word and translation of The Creator can set a person in a wrong direction. Just because Jesus has been called the Shepherd does not mean that we are sheep with our eyes covered with wool. Jesus spoke in parables, giving all who listened at least two sides to one situation and more than one path to follow. He knew that all people would not choose the same path or hear in the same way, yet they would follow a path that he described from the message they receiced from the parable. That is what the term speaking in tongues means to me.
brotheryochanan wrote.
The posts she numerously posted are incorrect and i am correcting. Had she posted less i would respond less. So its not so much hounding, its more necessity.
= - = - = -
I don't think that I have seen anyone posting comments in forums who are 100% correct in their analogies.
King Solomon once said that it is "ALL" Vanity
I forget where or who said, (I think, Samuel?) said "Nothing is as it appears to be)
I guess this is just my opinion; but I believe, that if the bible is the word of God, it would have to make perfect sense. And when it doesn't make perfect sense, either, we are not understanding it correctly.
Which means we are not taking every thing into consideration.
99.9% of what is written in the Old Testament is about Gods covenant with the seed of Abraham.
There wasn't anything special about the Hebrew people.
It is written that God chose them for no particular reason except to show his power to the rest of the world through them.
It also speaks of the many ways in which the seed of Abraham broke that covenant.
In my opinion, Debra is correct that Christianity holds many poor translations as sacred truths.
Take for instance, the word Messiah. At the time King Cyrus conquered Babylon, he was considered to be their Messiah which brought them out of their exile, allowing all that chose to do so, to return to Jerusalem and rebuild their temple as previous prophesy had foretold.
This could go on almost for ever but I'll end this here.Jerami, you are right. Regarding of Deborah she is right about translations of the Bible. But it is not we are loosing salvation because we do not know everything. The Bible KJV translation was not done by king but by many experts. It was retranslated from Greek. NKJV was translated from Hebrew and NT from Greek. Catholics translated from Latin. Then more translation came about 50 or more. It is fine with me. I can compare German, Russian, Slovak, Czech and originals Hebrew and Greek. There were some improvements all the time, except few. I enjoy that. But we have long tradition of translating experiences. If one is speaking in Hebrew it does not mean he is better translator as others. I know it since I am writing and translating in at least two languages.
although we read that cyrus:
Isaiah 45:1 Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held, to subdue nations before him;
has the word annointed (H4899 - usually a consecrated person (as a king, priest, or saint) specifically the Messiah)
We cannot literally make cyrus Messiah because Messiah would have to be jewish and cyrus, clearly is not, therefore we must use one of the other definitions, perhaps king. Since priests do the killing of sacrifices we cannot say the people were sacrifices and saints, well, you get the picture.
So, Nothing is as it appears to be would be a silly thing to adhere to as a doctrine because quite obviously some things are exactly as they appear to be. I am sure that a proper translation might be 'not all things are as they appear to be' and this would be more correct.
Deborah says more than just christianity has many poor translations. In fact i am thinking that to say catholicism instead of christianity would hit the nail on the head quite accurately. In fact i have shown that her interpretations of the bible verses are completely poor.
How many perceptions are there as to who and what God is?
How many different translations of what he said is there?
How many interpretations of those translations of what he said is there?
It is human nature to think that we have found the only correct one.
Somehow or another, we need to get back to a basic understanding.
The question is; HOW do we do that?
Imagine the giant cedar trees of Lebanon. When left to its own devices it grows tall and straight. BUT, imagine how small of a thing it would be if we clipped off the tiny tip from the top of tree, it branches and grows in different directions.
Do this repeatedly and we have created a giant Bonsai tree. The roots remain the same.
Everyone is sitting on a different limb saying, "I am in the cedar tree". "Everyone else is on a false representation of that which the tree is supposed to be". But not me!
It doesn't matter how many times we switch limbs to sit on, we are still sitting in a Bonsi tree.
Imagine if we had never topped the tree in the first place.
It would forever be growing straight and tall, reaching up into the heavens.
Religion today, is that Bonsai tree.
Maybe that’s the way it is supposed to be.
Another version of the story of the tower of Babel!Learn Hebrew and Greek.
But new translator wants only help.I don't think that mistranslations are as much of a problem as it has been made out to be.
One instance that comes to mind does make a difference. I believe this lies at the core of Christian misunderstanding., ... When used in prophesy the word translated meaning "a Time" in one instance, and sometimes "A little while" in another.
In Prophesy, a time, times and an half a time is referring to a specific period of time. So A Time would also be a specific period of time, not "A little while".
As I understand prophesy, A Time is equal to approx 480 of our years.
A Time equals a little more than 52 weeks.
A season is 13 weeks,
The major problem is that people get carried away "Interpreting" the meaning of Many verses every chance they get, when there is NO need to do so.
When we study the prophesy in the OT and examine the events in history which took place afterwards, TO me it makes sense that Jesus meant exactly what is written when he said; "This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled" but no one knows what day or time of day it will happen.
AND ... When he said, "Some of YOU standing here shall see the son of man coming in the clouds sitting at the right hand of power".
When we as Christians read this verse, we do not want to believe it as written, bCause we think that we have missed out on something when in fact that is not true.
All that would mean is that we were born too late to catch the First bus.
When we misinterpret this, a need is created to miss interpret everything else concerning prophesy, because we want to make sense out of it.
And when we can't ?? we dismiss it all and simply say that none of it has happened YET.
Which in turn .. creates a bushel basket full of other misinterpretations for us to argue about.
As I've said before .. I don't think we are not supposed to understand everything .. YET.
I guess I would say that I have blind faith that God does exist, and that his laws are written within my heart. And I try to obey them.
Am I suposed to have blind faith in words written upon parchment?
What exactly does God want me to have faith about?
I think that if God were to answer this question, the answer would not be one of many words.Absolutely. The only laws written by God (not by people) are 10 commandments and those are known by a short word "conscience", laws written in our hearts. What else do we need?
Well it seems that "Religion" has compiled quite a large list.
I think that if we could recognize that we are ALL souls which existed before we chose to interact with human form, and we chose these which we are dealing with; we Just Might understand each other a bit better even before we meet for the first time.
At least that's what I have come to be Aa thinkin!*****************************
We need more than the ten. God's laws were never changed, without him telling everyone. Anything that was changed, should be found in scripture.
One of the ten commandments was changed. The Children are no longer punished for the sins of their parents.If we need more than Ten, then we should start to sacrifice animals and stone the people. Otherwise it would be again selective.
*************
All of the laws are given by God. Exodus says God wrote them with his finger.
Show me where it says the ten is all we need.
Now don't tell me you are Jewish by religion...not in teaching the laws are not in effect.Dvora, ani ken ehudia. noladiti ehudia mi ima ehudia. ani lo datia, mipnei she ani sonet dat. ha-shem (elohim) hu gam lo dati. le ha-shem ein tsura, az ein lo etsbaot. hu natan lanu luchot ha-brit. hu bara otam kmo she hu bara at haolam.
Now, let's see if you understand what I wrote to you in Hebrew.**************************
Sorry I took so long, I have been away
That’s odd. On one of my hubs I replied to you and said something about you being Jewish. You commented that you have to admit that although you are fluent in Hebrew, you are Russian and it is your primary language….until about 8 months ago when I said you are Jewish only if your mother is, or you convert….you suddenly became Jewish.
I never said God had fingers, the scripture says it.
Exodus 31:18
“And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.”
The finger of God means also that the laws came directly from God
God can do anything he wants, if he wants a finger to write, there it is.
None of what you say sounds Jewish.
I use to be Christian and I use to believe in the New Testament..and I use it to show where beliefs are taken wrong.
When you challenge someone to read what you have written be sure you write it correctly. Your phonetics are atrocious
You be you and I’ll be me.Hi Deborah. Too bad I have to go to work right now for long hours, but just a short reply.
1. Where did you exactly find me saying that I am Russian? From the day first I am letting everyone know that I am Jewish, born in the Soviet Union, hence Russian is my native language and the only language that I speak without accent. I even wrote a hub about growing Jewish in the soviet country, underlying how sometimes you had to take consequences of being different (Jewish in my case).
2. I also speak English and Hebrew, both with Russian accent. While living for 10 years in Israel where I immigrated because of being Jewish, I studied Hebrew very seriously. What I wrote here in Hebrew is correct in grammar and vocabulary, but I wrote it in Latin letters. This is called transliteration. I can write the same in Cyrillic letters, it will be transliteration too. "Phonetics" as I know, is something that you hear and pronounce. My phonetics would sound with Russian accent, but my letters are what I write. If you prefer the Hebrew alphabet, I will come back after work and will write it in Hebrew-Hebrew, though I am not sure it will make much difference for you.
3. I will repeat that I am not religious from the traditional point of view, which means that I do not go to the synagogue and do not pray by written prayers. I have my own relationship with my God and my own talk with Him. I read TANACH in Hebrew (in Hebrew letters, not in transliteration) and I am able to see the meaning.
See you later.
we need only one commandment
Love the lord God with all your heart, mind and soul
we do not need to bury our sandals up the road aways and change them for the pair we have on to walk another 2,000 steps. sheer idiocy.
Every one will end up with this "penalty", a sinner or righteous. LOL.
In the OT we see that physical death was a penalty indeed.
In the NT we see that spiritual death is the penalty indeed.
Of course all must die the physical death but in christ is life eternalEnoch and Elijah say you're wrong. They had no physical death.
really...
John 3:13 And no man# hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven
#G3762-not even one (man, woman or thing) none, nobody, never man, no man, +none of these things, not (any, at all, -thing) nought.
So jesus lied?
2 Kings 2:11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a WHIRLWIN into heaven.
There is interpretation discrepancy about elijah going to heaven - heaven is defined as 3 things: the atmosphere, space and Gods throne room. Elijah was taken up to heaven sounds like Gods throne room but actually to the jewish eyes it would more than likely have been the atmosphere. Elijah resurfaces on earth in:
2 Chronicles 21:12 And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah, 873-849 BC
Several years after elijah was taken away a letter was received from him.
Elijah did not go to Gods throne room. Why? because elijah was taken up in WHIRLWIND and whirlwinds function on the earthy plane, the earthly heaven. Elijah simply retired and God took him so elisha could replace him and God set elijah somewhere else. The people of that time did not believe that God had taken elijah up to heaven because they sent 50 people looking for him and none found him.
When we get to enoch
Genesis 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
This is only sloppy interpretation that people assume enoch went to heaven - Gods throne room again, jesus says no way.
Paul says:
Hebrews 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated# him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.
Hebrews 11:13 These all died in faith
#translated g3346-to transfer, literally transport, carry over, change, remove.
This same Greek word is rendered "REMOVED" in Gal.1:6. In
ACT 7:16 it is rendered "CARRIED OVER" where we read that after
Jacob DIED his body was "carried over" - removed, TRANSLATED -
to Sychem
I do not believe these people were intended for immortality and eternal life before Jesus Christ. I think we read too much into these verses and ignore much of what is around them.
There is more evidence against them going to the third heaven but this is the milk of the lesson.You are right. As I see it, no one cand enter into the Throne room unless he is born again, Eph 2:8 For by grace are you saved through faith.
Keep dancing, you're entertaining. The Bible lied. That's a good one. When you look foolish just interpret it to suit your cause.
Yep sounds about right to me rather than the mystical nonsense people often read into the bible.
Gusser I know that. Because later Jesus died for them, they went to Paradise including Enoch to "bosom of Abraham" holding place. It was actually we call it first "Rupture(s)". We may not die either but our body may be transformed to glorify body. BTW all spiritually died become mortal. Another death is physical. Jesus said to Nik.: you must be born again.
***************************
That God will be your God and won't forsake you.
The Laws are to do away from anything that draws you away from God and anything that is cruel....we need more than ten.
Strangling an animal for meat is cruel. Some pig farmers do this to all their animals, they hang them with chains and it takes several hours for them to die.
Anything that has blood in it. The blood carrys the genes and cells and it can make you ill. Whatever virus they have becomes your's
People use to eat animals a little at a time while they were alive..this is cruel..etc.Deborah Sexton said ..
"That God will be your God and won't forsake you".
- = - = -
me
I know Dat's rite~ I read that in a book once upon a time.
And I thought I knew what it was sayin, until I heard him say it!
=============================
Deborah Sexton said ..
The Laws are to do away from anything that draws you away from God and anything that is cruel....we need more than ten.
= - = - --- -
ME
The Laws are to prevent us from damaging our body, mind and spirit.
And the ten commandments are all rolled up this concept when we see behind the words.
======================================================
Deborah Sexton said ..
Strangling an animal for meat is cruel. Some pig farmers do this to all their animals, they hang them with chains and it takes several hours for them to die.
- == - = -
me
Not only that, but the terror going through the mind of the animal releases a different mix of chemichles through the animals body causing a degree of contamunation. How much ? Science hasn't discovered this yet ..
===========================================================
Anything that has blood in it. The blood carrys the genes and cells and it can make you ill. Whatever virus they have becomes your's
People use to eat animals a little at a time while they were alive..this is cruel..etc.
- - -- =-=
me
Right again !!! I kinda think that "way .... back" in history; before written comunication became popular .... Most people kinda knew what to eat and what not to ... without ever thinking about it "Much"
God IS Good.
Related Discussions
- 124
can born again Christians sin?
by thirdmillenium 7 years ago
I am a staunch Christian and have met and talked with many a born again Christian. I had no nerve to ask them to their face if they continued sinning. Very forgettable and forgivable sins like say, a little gluttony: one little bite off that Black Forest you love. Is it still sin in their eyes?Can...
- 22
To be a born again Christian is easy but to be a good disciple of Christ is very
by L M 11 years ago
To be a born again Christian is easy but to be a good disciple of Christ is very hard. Do you agree?
- 37
Can a "real" Christian interpret the Bible without condemnation.
by Eric Dierker 12 years ago
Can a "real" Christian interpret the Bible without condemnation.I study and preach and learn about the Bible every single day. I have been involved with church in a lay minister or pastor position for over a decade. And I can seriously say that I can interpret the entire Bible, Catholic...
- 458
A Message for Non-Believers: Stop being so Intolerant
by Mick Menous 14 years ago
Personally, I really don't see what gives non-believers the right to criticize and verbally hurt innocent religions who want to do nothing but help spread peace, love, and do charity work for the poor. After much personal researching I've done, I've determined these 3 false excuses that they use so...
- 29
If a Christian stops attending church and starts from home reading&studying his
by gvalenoae777 9 years ago
If a Christian stops attending church and starts from home reading&studying his bible is he in sin?many christians attend church and are no different than those who do not attend. If a person committed to Jesus, decides to no longer attend the building but loves Jesus daily. Is making a...
- 32
In Christianity, do non believers go to hell?
by cblack 9 years ago
In Christianity, do non believers go to hell?What happens to the people that believe in another religion and another God. If the Christian God is the only true God, then are those people damned?