There are only 12 Apostles
Qadosh Stephanos
There are only --- TWELVE, hello --- Apostles as written in the book:
Revelation 21:14 (ASV)
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them twelve
names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
Who are these two additional Apostles written about in the following?
Acts 14:14 (ASV)
But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of it, they rent their
garments, and sprang forth among the multitude, crying out
Apostles are to be witnesses. Maybe the nail hammer guy was a witness?
Acts 1:21-22 (ASV)
Of the men therefore that have companied with us all the time that the
Lord Jesus went in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism
of John, unto the day that he was received up from us, of these must
one become a witness with us of his resurrection.
Acts 4:33 (ASV)
And with great power gave the apostles their witness of the
resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
Who replaced Judas Iscariot? Casting "lots" was God's democracy.
Acts 1:23-26 (ASV)
And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed
Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, who
knowest the hearts of all men, show of these two the one whom thou
hast chosen, to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from
which Judas fell away, that he might go to his own place. And they
gave lots for them; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was
numbered with the eleven apostles.
Joshua 18:10 (ASV)
And Joshua cast lots for them in Shiloh before Jehovah: and there
Joshua divided the land unto the children of Israel according to their
divisions.
Why do Bibles contain 14 Apostles? Let's review Revelation again, Ok.
Revelation 21:14 (ASV)
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them twelve
names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
If someone is not an apostle of the Lamb, then who exactly are they?
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:uh2go35ofl5e83mup...@4ax.com...
>
> There are only --- TWELVE, hello --- Apostles as written in the book:
Guess again: There were twelve apostles in the FIRST generation of the
church. Then they grew old and died and another generation grew up and took
their places.
Paul, Barnabas, [Acts 14:14 et al], Andronicus, Junia [Romans 16:6], and
possibly Sosthenes, Timothy, Judas Barsabas, and Silas are all named among
the second generation of apostles in the New Testament.
One would also have to take Mark, Luke, James the Just, and possibly Jude
into consideration, too, as their contributions were every bit as apostolic
as the original twelve.
And this is for sure not a complete list of the second generation of
potential apostles, such as Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon,
Parmenas, and Nocolas, who were chosen by the first generation to suceed
them.
So only the ORIGINAL TWELVE had to meet the requirements Peter set, NOT
every apostle since.
The question is, was Matthias the actual replacement for Judas Iscariot, or
was Paul, and would Paul be considered to be of the first generation or
second generation of Apostles, as it was Paul's testimony to what the OTHER
team was doing that was just as essential to the writing of the New
Testament as the others?
Ike
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:uh2go35ofl5e83mup...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > There are only --- TWELVE, hello --- Apostles as written in the book:
>
> Guess again: There were twelve apostles in the FIRST generation of the
> church. Then they grew old and died and another generation grew up and took
> their places.
>
> Paul, Barnabas, [Acts 14:14 et al], Andronicus, Junia [Romans 16:6], and
> possibly Sosthenes, Timothy, Judas Barsabas, and Silas are all named among
> the second generation of apostles in the New Testament.
Once again, you prove just how IGNORANT you really are. Paul was born
between A.D. 0 and A.D. 5 and companied for a time with the real
apostles. In case you can't follow this, that means Paul and Barnabas
were both alive during the Messiah's lifetime and the lifetimes of the
true apostles. Your theory's as bonkers as your other theories.
<snip rest of his bunk concerning his adulterous Pauline cult>
Linda Lee
Michael Christ
>> There are only --- TWELVE, hello --- Apostles as written in the book:
Ike wrote:
> Guess again: There were twelve apostles in the FIRST generation of the
> church. Then they grew old and died and another generation grew up and
> took their places.
>
> Paul, Barnabas, [Acts 14:14 et al], Andronicus, Junia [Romans 16:6], and
> possibly Sosthenes, Timothy, Judas Barsabas, and Silas are all named among
> the second generation of apostles in the New Testament.
>
> One would also have to take Mark, Luke, James the Just, and possibly Jude
> into consideration, too, as their contributions were every bit as
> apostolic as the original twelve.
>
> And this is for sure not a complete list of the second generation of
> potential apostles, such as Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon,
> Parmenas, and Nocolas, who were chosen by the first generation to suceed
> them.
>
> So only the ORIGINAL TWELVE had to meet the requirements Peter set, NOT
> every apostle since.
>
> The question is, was Matthias the actual replacement for Judas Iscariot,
> or was Paul, and would Paul be considered to be of the first generation or
> second generation of Apostles, as it was Paul's testimony to what the
> OTHER team was doing that was just as essential to the writing of the New
> Testament as the others?
>
> Ike
Hey Ike, any thoughts on these verses...
Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour
out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall
prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream
dreams:
Act 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those
days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
Act 2:19 And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth
beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke:
Act 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood,
before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of
the Lord shall be saved.
Mike
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My Sons are born of Me
They are My Spirit.
In them is no darkness at all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:53b20db2-2aa5-4c49...@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 12, 1:01 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>>
>> news:uh2go35ofl5e83mup...@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > There are only --- TWELVE, hello --- Apostles as written in the book:
>>
>> Guess again: There were twelve apostles in the FIRST generation of the
>> church. Then they grew old and died and another generation grew up and
>> took
>> their places.
>>
>> Paul, Barnabas, [Acts 14:14 et al], Andronicus, Junia [Romans 16:6], and
>> possibly Sosthenes, Timothy, Judas Barsabas, and Silas are all named
>> among
>> the second generation of apostles in the New Testament.
>
> Once again, you prove just how IGNORANT you really are. Paul was born
> between A.D. 0 and A.D. 5 and companied for a time with the real
> apostles.
I alluded to this when I wrote the question about which group Paul would
belong to, which you snipped, oh, ignorant one.
> In case you can't follow this, that means Paul and Barnabas
> were both alive during the Messiah's lifetime and the lifetimes of the
> true apostles.
You idiot: I've said this, as I told you Paul was the one who supplied the
information from the other team.
Nevertheless, Paul and Barnabas, as well as others, were named apostles
later, as I cited.
> Your theory's as bonkers as your other theories.
There's no "theory" to it, cultist: OTHERS were called Apostle BESIDES the
twelve as time went by.
> <snip rest of his bunk concerning his adulterous Pauline cult>
Oh, you mean God's church, which you have no part in.
Got it.
Ike
Qadosh Stephanos
<christ...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour
>out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall
>prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream
>dreams:
>Act 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those
>days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
>Act 2:19 And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth
>beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke:
>Act 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood,
>before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
>Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of
>the Lord shall be saved.
>
>Mike
Maybe it would have been helpful if you had included Joel chapter 2.
Proper context is important. I mean pigs and cows are also of flesh.
The scattered Israel. Lost sheep are the peoples surrounded by dogs.
Acts 2:3-6 (ASV)
And there appeared unto them tongues parting asunder, like as of fire;
and it sat upon each one of them. And they were all filled with the
Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave
them utterance. Now there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men,
from every nation under heaven. And when this sound was heard, the
multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man
heard them speaking in his own language.
I guess you think Babylonian tongues is the same tongues of Pentecost.
... because that every man heard them speaking in his own language ...
Paul's tongue is the other language, the language of demon possession.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:13oh7hs...@corp.supernews.com...
> QS wrote:
>>> There are only --- TWELVE, hello --- Apostles as written in the book:
>
> Ike wrote:
>> Guess again: There were twelve apostles in the FIRST generation of the
>> church. Then they grew old and died and another generation grew up and
>> took their places.
>>
>> Paul, Barnabas, [Acts 14:14 et al], Andronicus, Junia [Romans 16:6], and
>> possibly Sosthenes, Timothy, Judas Barsabas, and Silas are all named
>> among the second generation of apostles in the New Testament.
>>
>> One would also have to take Mark, Luke, James the Just, and possibly Jude
>> into consideration, too, as their contributions were every bit as
>> apostolic as the original twelve.
>>
>> And this is for sure not a complete list of the second generation of
>> potential apostles, such as Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon,
>>
>> So only the ORIGINAL TWELVE had to meet the requirements Peter set, NOT
>> every apostle since.
>>
>> The question is, was Matthias the actual replacement for Judas Iscariot,
>> or was Paul, and would Paul be considered to be of the first generation
>> or second generation of Apostles, as it was Paul's testimony to what the
>> OTHER team was doing that was just as essential to the writing of the New
>> Testament as the others?
>>
>> Ike
>
> Hey Ike, any thoughts on these verses...
>
> Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will
> pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters
> shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men
> shall dream dreams:
> Act 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those
> days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
> Act 2:19 And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth
> beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke:
> Act 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood,
> before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
> Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name
> of the Lord shall be saved.
Sure.
Peter thought the Pentecost Joel was talking about was the one He witnessed,
when the one that happened to the twelve was only the second of three.
The setting of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit that Joel gave did NOT
depict the conditions that existed in Peter's day, but the conditions that
will exist in the End of the Age (which Peter truncated by his saying, which
was OK, but not the whole story).
See, there are a couple of little statements at the end of Joel's prophecy
that Peter left out of his quote...
And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon
all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men
shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the
servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and
fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the
moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the
LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be
deliverance, as the LORD hath said, AND IN THE REMNANT WHOM THE LORD SHALL
CALL.
oops.
Joel said in the remnant. Peter was not in "the remnant."
Also note that Joel wrote in the GREAT AND TERRIBLE (Heb. meaning "fearful")
DAY of the Lord, whereas Luke wrote "notable" (Greek meaning "conspicuous"
rather than "fearful"). This kind of change frequently occurred as the
authors tried to make the case that their days were the End of the Age, not
understanding the triune nature of prophecy.
Now, it's Jesus' SECOND advent that will be "terrible," when He fulfills the
OTHER messianic prophecies about Himself, the one's that ain't so nice.
But in Peter's defense, how would he know any different? He was in the
middle of the second round of a three-round prophecy, and he didn't live
past the second of three destructions of the temple.
In fact, all of the New Testament writers were in the second round which is
why they thought it was the "last days" when it wasn't.
Except John.
John, who lived past the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, started to
realize that Jesus spoke DUALISTICALLY, which is why his Gospel and
Revelation constantly point out dualisms (and even triunisms) that the
earlier writers didn't notice.
Anyway, there is another Pentecost coming in the End of the Age, just like
the first two, starting in the Remnant (as Joel said but Peter left out), as
John documents in Revelation 14.
Thus, Pentecost "was" (as happened with Moses and the Seventy), Pentecost
"is" (as happened to the twelve), and Pentecost "will be" again, starting in
the remnant in the end of the age.
But I'm not sure why you brought this up in connection with a conversation
about the apostles.
???
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
One notices that you throw this lie out there, but can never substantiate
it.
Not that it matters--you just leave more room in God's Kingdom for the rest
of us, you bearing false witness and keeping yourself out and all.
Ike
Qadosh Stephanos
Ah ha. Now your naked.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
???
Nope.
Just checked.
I put my pants on this morning, so I'm not naked.
Now, having had the fun little exchange, you can go on back to your little
cult clique and stay off the Christian boards--they are not interested in a
THING you have to say.
Ike
Qadosh Stephanos
<xeickleb...@verizon.net> wrote:
Are you talking to me in flesh, or are you talking to my Messiah God?
Michael Christ
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleb...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:dq2ij.473$U4.260@trndny01...
Okay, only asking what you think, what about 'I will pour out of my Spirit
upon all flesh', do you think that there will be a large harvest of souls
for the Lord or will it continue in 'many are called, but few are chosen' or
maybe there will be a large pouring out in the sense that the world will
know that God is real, but not necessarily leading to some huge repentance?
Ike wrote:
> Thus, Pentecost "was" (as happened with Moses and the Seventy), Pentecost
> "is" (as happened to the twelve), and Pentecost "will be" again, starting
> in the remnant in the end of the age.
>
> But I'm not sure why you brought this up in connection with a conversation
> about the apostles.
>
> ???
>
> Ike
Thanks for that.
And...why? Why these sort of things arise because you are you, Ike, not for
any silly limitation of subject matter. :-).
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
MORON,
You are the one who follows the cult of Paul and calls Jesus a liar in
a lame attempt to defend Paul's admission of his "lie". If anyone is a
liar, a cultish whore and an adulterer, it is YOU.
I am a follower of Yeshua` and adhere to the writings of his true
apostles.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
You'll notice ladies and gentlemen that the beast does NOT deal with the
facts, but continues on her bitchy tirade.
FACT: The title "Apostle" was used for OTHER people in the New Testament
BESIDES the original twelve, as their original apostleship descended from
one generation to the next.
> I am a follower of Yeshua` and adhere to the writings of his true
> apostles.
YOU are a Jezebellian beast from the depths of hell, a lunatic from the
fringe, bearing false witness every time someone proves your lies wrong.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
God does NOT always pour out His Spirit to save. Take, for instance, King
Saul, whose ability to prophecy in no way kept him out of trouble. Also note
the Ciaphas also prophesied correctly "better that one man should die than a
whole nation should perish," which was RIGHT, but not in the context he
meant.
I would conclude that "many are called but few are chosen" will continue
right through the End of the Age and the Millennial Kingdom, as proven by
Satan's ability to STILL incite a rebellion when the dragon is released
after the thousand years.
There is no accounting for stupidity, huh?
> Ike wrote:
>> Thus, Pentecost "was" (as happened with Moses and the Seventy), Pentecost
>> "is" (as happened to the twelve), and Pentecost "will be" again, starting
>> in the remnant in the end of the age.
>>
>> But I'm not sure why you brought this up in connection with a
>> conversation about the apostles.
>>
>> ???
>>
>> Ike
>
> Thanks for that.
>
> And...why? Why these sort of things arise because you are you, Ike, not
> for any silly limitation of subject matter. :-).
I was just curious as to how we got from one point to another, as I thought
you might have been trying to make some case I didn't see.
Ike
Linda Lee
Go to hell Eikenboob, you scum of the earth; and quit posting your
lies directly to me.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
If you don't want to hear it, stay of the Christian boards and stick with
your cult group's board.
Ike
Michael Christ
>> Okay, only asking what you think, what about 'I will pour out of my
>> Spirit upon all flesh', do you think that there will be a large harvest
>> of souls for the Lord or will it continue in 'many are called, but few
>> are chosen' or maybe there will be a large pouring out in the sense that
>> the world will know that God is real, but not necessarily leading to some
>> huge repentance?
Ike wrote:
> God does NOT always pour out His Spirit to save. Take, for instance, King
> Saul, whose ability to prophecy in no way kept him out of trouble. Also
> note the Ciaphas also prophesied correctly "better that one man should die
> than a whole nation should perish," which was RIGHT, but not in the
> context he meant.
Amen. And amen.
Ike wrote:
> I would conclude that "many are called but few are chosen" will continue
> right through the End of the Age and the Millennial Kingdom, as proven by
> Satan's ability to STILL incite a rebellion when the dragon is released
> after the thousand years.
> There is no accounting for stupidity, huh?
It is his nature; can't help himself. Like the story of the scorpion and
the fox...
Once long ago in the vast lands of the desert there was a great and vast
river that had to be crossed for animals to seek food and water elsewhere in
the desert. As it was on this day Fox had come to the point where it had to
cross the river in its travels. As it stood contemplating the best way to
cross the river safely Fox's life long enemy Scorpion came upon it and began
to talk to Fox.
"Fox as I was walking along the river bank looking for food I noticed a
particularily easy place to cross the river where the water is not so deep
and not so swift. As it is I would like to cross over myself also but as I
am so small it would be impossible. Would you be willing to take me across
if I show you this place to cross the river?" asked Scorpion.
"Why should I take you across? How could I possibly trust you will not sting
me on the way across as we have been life long enemies?" asked Fox.
"Why would I sting you? For if I stung you it would mean you would drown
then both of us would die." replied Scorpion.
Fox thought this over for a bit while carefully watching Scorpion with a
distrustful eye. Eventually Fox said, "Show me where the place is and I will
take you across."
"First place me on your back and then I will show you. For otherwise you may
jump in and leave me behind once I show you." replied Scorpion.
Fox thought this over for a bit while carefully watching Scorpion with a
distrustful eye. Then walked over to Scorpion and allowed him to climb onto
its back. Scorpion directed Fox to where the river was not so deep nor so
swift such that it was a safer place to cross over. As Fox was swimming
across the river and had reached the middle of the river Fox felt a sharp
stinging sensation on its back and realized it had been stung by Scorpion.
Fox cried out, "How could you sting me we shall both drown now?"
The Scorpion shrugged and said, 'Its just my nature."
(Cut and pasted from somewhere)
Michael Christ wrote:
>> And...why? Why these sort of things arise because you are you, Ike, not
>> for any silly limitation of subject matter. :-).
Ike wrote:
> I was just curious as to how we got from one point to another, as I
> thought you might have been trying to make some case I didn't see.
Okay, fair enough, and admirable.
Qadosh Stephanos
<xeickleb...@verizon.net> wrote:
>If you don't want to hear it, stay of the Christian boards and stick with
>your cult group's board.
How do you justify gain in merchandising your own interpretation God?
Matthew 21:12-13 (ASV)
And Jesus entered into the temple of God, and cast out all them that
sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of he
money-changers, and the seats of them that sold the doves; and he
saith unto them, It is written, My house shall be called a house of
prayer: but ye make it a den of robbers.
Nehemiah 13:19-20 (ASV)
And it came to pass that, when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark
before the sabbath, I commanded that the doors should be shut, and
commanded that they should not be opened till after the sabbath: and
some of my servants set I over the gates, that there should no burden
be brought in on the sabbath day. So the merchants and sellers of all
kind of wares lodged without Jerusalem once or twice.
Christian boards are of one cult or another. Smorgasboards of Paulism.
Perhaps you can inform people the most true Christian board of bordem.
There is your boards, and there is boredom. You called Messiah a liar.
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> news:75520b0d-8c7e-42e3...@q77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jan 12, 8:51 pm, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> > <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:19b95edb-5b5b-4ea7...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Jan 12, 7:04 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> >> > <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> >> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> >> >>news:53b20db2-2aa5-4c49...@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >> > On Jan 12, 1:01 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> >> >> > <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> >> >> >>news:uh2go35ofl5e83mup...@4ax.com...
>
> >> >> >> > There are only --- TWELVE, hello --- Apostles as written in the
> >> >> >> > book:
>
> >> >> >> Guess again: There were twelve apostles in the FIRST generation of
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> church. Then they grew old and died and another generation grew up
> >> >> >> and
<rest of moronic nonsense snipped>
>
> >> > MORON,
>
> >> > You are the one who follows the cult of Paul and calls Jesus a liar in
> >> > a lame attempt to defend Paul's admission of his "lie". If anyone is a
> >> > liar, a cultish whore and an adulterer, it is YOU.
>
>
> >> > I am a follower of Yeshua` and adhere to the writings of his true
> >> > apostles.
>
>
> > Go to hell Eikenboob, you scum of the earth; and quit posting your
> > lies directly to me.
>
> If you don't want to hear it, stay of the Christian boards and stick with
> your cult group's board.
>
> Ike
alt.messianic is not a 'cult group board' you MORONIC SWINE, it is
Christian. You are so dense you think anyone who uses the term Messiah
is in a cult. You're of the lying Pauline cult that claims the Messiah
is a liar like your idol Paul, which will cause you to suffer the
second death in the lake of fire.
Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and
murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all
liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and
brimstone: which is the second death.
Qadosh Stephanos
<christ...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>Okay, fair enough, and admirable.
But "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." said:
>Jesus did "lie" as the occasion called for.
Qadosh Stephanos
<xeickleb...@verizon.net> wrote:
>FACT: The title "Apostle" was used for OTHER people in the New Testament
Name more than three.
Qadosh Stephanos
Michael Christ
>>Okay, fair enough, and admirable.
Qadosh Stephanos wrote:
> But "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." said: Jesus did "lie" as the occasion called
> for.
I don't take second hand information/gossip as gospel, Steve. You know that
you are not perfect. Reasonably then, your perception in things can be off.
Is man the judge of God? If Jesus wants to me to believe something that is
not true, He can, He is God, and He will have, if He did, a good reason for
it. He is not limited to the minds of men.
If I remember correctly God told Moses that He was going to destroy the
people; He didn't. Are you Qadosh Stephanos going to call God a liar?
Debra
>
> - Show quoted text -
Messiah like reaction??
::: good news runner :::
Michael Christ <christ...@westnet.com.au> typed:
> Michael Christ wrote:
>>> Okay, fair enough, and admirable.
>
> Qadosh Stephanos wrote:
>> But "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." said: Jesus did "lie" as the occasion
>> called for.
>
> I don't take second hand information/gossip as gospel, Steve. You
> know that you are not perfect. Reasonably then, your perception in
> things can be off.
> Is man the judge of God? If Jesus wants to me to believe something
> that is not true, He can, He is God, and He will have, if He did, a
> good reason for it. He is not limited to the minds of men.
>
> If I remember correctly God told Moses that He was going to destroy
> the people; He didn't. Are you Qadosh Stephanos going to call God a
> liar?
It was not Qadosh Stephanos, it was Ike who did.
Linda Lee
wrote:
> Jesus did "lie" as the occasion called for.
Don't you mean - But "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." said: Jesus did "lie" as
the occasion called for. ?
Linda Lee
wrote:
> Michael Christ wrote:
> >>Okay, fair enough, and admirable.
> Qadosh Stephanos wrote:
> > But "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." said: Jesus did "lie" as the occasion called
> > for.
>
> I don't take second hand information/gossip as gospel, Steve. You know that
> you are not perfect. Reasonably then, your perception in things can be off.
Ike has said that repeatedly the last couple of weeks, and won't
retract it.
>
> Is man the judge of God? If Jesus wants to me to believe something that is
> not true, He can, He is God, and He will have, if He did, a good reason for
> it. He is not limited to the minds of men.
>
> If I remember correctly God told Moses that He was going to destroy the
> people; He didn't. Are you Qadosh Stephanos going to call God a liar?
Why are you trying to turn this around? Ike is the one who asserts
"Jesus lied" and he implies God lied in the OT as well.
Linda Lee
What is your point Debra? You think it's okay for him to call me "the
beast", "a Jezebellian beast from the depths of hell, a lunatic from
the fringe"? I guess so, since you have no criticism at all for him,
only for me.
You are about the most judgmental person I've seen on this newsgroup,
and no one needs an admission from you to know that you're not perfect
just like all other humans, so your superior attitude is false and
your judgmentalism is hypocritical.
Alright, here's a "Messiah like reaction":
You and Ike are both hypocrites, fools, and blind guides. (From
Matthew chapter 23) Satisfied?
I think you have a hate problem and are now targeting me because I
post to Snow whom you HATE. Btw, your hatred is not a Messiah like
reaction nor a godly reaction, and is more evidence of your hypocrisy.
Linda Lee
Since you don't accept gossip, here are Ike's own unaltered words:
Here is one post of Ike's in which he has stated Jesus lied:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible.prophecy/msg/d87091c1154b885c
Here is where Ike implies God is a liar:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.messianic/msg/fa38022df39feba9
Ike is willing to label Christ and God a liar, however, Ike denies
Paul ever lied, although Paul admits it: Rom 3:7 Paul says, "For if
the truth of God hath more abounded through *** my lie".***
That is the problem with cultish Paul worshippers like Ike; they'll
even accuse God in Heaven and God incarnate of being liars to defend
their true 'god', their lying false apostle Paul.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
I already did, when I said it the first time.
YOU go back and find it.
Ike
P.S. All it takes is ONE than isn't one of the original twelve to prove the
point.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:28:41 GMT, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> <xeickleb...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>If you don't want to hear it, stay of the Christian boards and stick with
>>your cult group's board.
>
> How do you justify gain in merchandising your own interpretation God?
LOL
Let me know when I actually have a "gain."
[snip]
> You called Messiah a liar.
Now you've lied.
I did NOT call Messiah a "liar." I said He lied at least once.
But you Pharisees can't tell the difference between the letter of the law
and the spirit of the law.
Ike
Nancy Rudins
>
> I alluded to this when I wrote the question about which group Paul would
> belong to,
The Beatles, of course.
Where is the scriptural foundation for a second or third or more
generation of apostles?
Kind regards,
Nancy
--
E = F-flat
Musician's Theory of Relativity
Nancy Rudins nru...@ncsa.uiuc.edu
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
I didn't "label" Christ OR God a liar.
I told the Bible truth, as David Himself proclaimed of God...
2 Sam 22:26-28
With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful,
and with the upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright.
With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure;
and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself unsavoury.
And the afflicted people thou wilt save:
but thine eyes are upon the haughty, that thou mayest bring them
down.
> Rom 3:7 Paul says, "For if
> the truth of God hath more abounded through *** my lie".***
You're too stupid to know WHAT Paul was saying, moron.
[snip the rest of the dawdle]
Ike
Diana BB
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:13olurh...@news.supernews.com...
> H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
>
>>
>> I alluded to this when I wrote the question about which group Paul would
>> belong to,
>
>
> The Beatles, of course.
>
> Where is the scriptural foundation for a second or third or more
> generation of apostles?
You know, I'm getting really sick and tired of reposting information I've
already posted because some jerk shows up late and doesn't check out the
previous threads of a conversation BEFORE jumping into the conversation.
You want the evidence?
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
CRETIN,
Revelation lists only twelves apostles of the Lamb. Why don't you
argue with John who wrote that? I think John knew of Paul since he
warns of people like him with the antichrist spirit repeatedly.
Surely with your incredible spirituality and being among Paul's elect
you can communicate with John in the spirit like Paul claims he did
with the Christ. LOL.
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
Lying Ike (Isn't that what Fred Stover calls you, btw?),
QUIT CALLING CHRIST A LIAR - YOU FREAKING FOOL.
You sound just like your damned idol Paul now. There is NO DIFFERENCE
between saying Christ lied and saying he's a liar.
QUIT CALLING CHRIST A LIAR - YOU FREAKING FOOL.
Christ is NOT A LIAR and Christ DID NOT LIE. YOU LIE.
YOU ARE THE LIAR LIKE YOUR IDOL PAUL SAYS ALL MEN ARE.
QUIT CALLING CHRIST A LIAR - YOU FREAKING FOOL.
P.S. CRETIN, QUIT CALLING CHRIST A LIAR - YOU FREAKING FOOL.
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
And you're such a CRETIN and unholy SWINE that you choose to ignore
Paul was justifying the LIE that he saw the spirit of the Christ who
he lied appointed him apostle to the Gentiles. THAT was the LIE PAUL'S
referring to, dumbass.
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Nancy Rudins" <nrud...@ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
LYIN' IKE/CRETIN,
Why are you so rude to women, you male chauvinist PIG?
Are you gay, or what?
Did your mommy attempt to beat the devil out of you?
Or was your disgusting lying self just rejected by every woman you
met?
Oh that's right; you're married, to a woman I assume; I'll bet
anything she stays with your hateful self solely out of fear, you MC
PIG.
QUIT CALLING CHRIST A LIAR, YOU LYING MORON.
QUIT CALLING CHRIST A LIAR, YOU LYING MORON.
Michael Christ
> It was not Qadosh Stephanos, it was Ike who did.
I know.
I quoted what Qadosh Stephanos said Ike said.
Linda Lee
wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:28:41 GMT, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
>
Qadosh,
Believe it or not, lying Ike is such a moron that he believes that all
of alt.messianic is a cult newsgroup apparently composed mainly of
Messianic Jews or Messianic Christians when it is almost entirely a
Pauline Christian newsgroup.
He's so dense he thinks anyone who uses the term Messiah is in a
cult.
Lying Ike's of the lying Pauline cult (the cult that came AFTER the
Messiah taught and sent the true apostles to preach) that claims the
Messiah is a liar like his lying idol 'god' Paul.
Michael Christ
Michael Christ wrote:
>> If I remember correctly God told Moses that He was going to destroy
>> the people; He didn't. Are you Qadosh Stephanos going to call God a
>> liar?
It takes a certain amount of maturity to understand.
When I said the above I was making a point to Qadosh Stephanos that no man
can limit God; He can do what He likes. In other words, Ike is not wrong in
saying what he said if he did say that. If the motive is pure, then
anything goes in God/Christ.
In simpler terms, people don't seem to realise that we are so much more
alike God than we realise; we were formed in His image. At times when I am
speaking to certain close ones I may say something like, 'I am sick and
tired of begging you to do what is right.' The spiritual message is: I'm
finished trying to convince you; its over.
It is a lie, I will never give up or forsake anyone, yet in the spirit I
have said I have. One motive for doing it is to illicit a right response.
Men might call it reverse physicology; God calls it a pure motive. There is
no human way or emotion that does not have a righteous place in God. Like I
said, men are much more like God than they realise only their motives are
impure. Indeed...
Tit 1:15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled
and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is
defiled.
I am reminded of Matthew...
Mat 17:24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute
money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
Mat 17:25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus
prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of
the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are
the children free.
Mat 17:27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea,
and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou
hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give
unto them for me and thee.
Jesus didn't pay the money because He had to; He paid it to keep them happy.
The ones that demanded the tribute money would have thought they won, but
they didn't. Jesus *got the money* from kings of the earth, for it was
their money (their invention) in the fishes mouth, and He just took it out
of their pockets (figuratively) and put it in their hand. Understand? They
(Jesus and Simon Peter) would have known this and found it amusing and
ironic for sure. Wise as serpents, harmless as doves. :-).
The ones that demanded the tribute money thought that Jesus had kneeled
before their righteousness, but no, **Jesus kneels at no man's footstool**
(what a champion!!). But oh, as the song goes, how great Thou art, He will
wash feet for mercy's sake.
Michael Christ
> Why are you trying to turn this around? Ike is the one who asserts
> "Jesus lied" and he implies God lied in the OT as well.
I am not out to get anyone, all I am interested in is truth Linda.
Michael Christ
> Since you don't accept gossip, here are Ike's own unaltered words:
>
> Here is one post of Ike's in which he has stated Jesus lied:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible.prophecy/msg/d87091c1154b885c
>
> Here is where Ike implies God is a liar:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.messianic/msg/fa38022df39feba9
>
> Ike is willing to label Christ and God a liar, however, Ike denies
> Paul ever lied, although Paul admits it: Rom 3:7 Paul says, "For if
> the truth of God hath more abounded through *** my lie".***
>
> That is the problem with cultish Paul worshippers like Ike; they'll
> even accuse God in Heaven and God incarnate of being liars to defend
> their true 'god', their lying false apostle Paul.
I chose not to be against anyone; what man is not in need of mercy?
I read what Ike wrote; He quoted Scripture Linda. If you don't like what he
said, discuss his references. If what you say is of the light, it will
resonate in him, even if he was to vehemently disagree.
The Lord is always here, there and everywhere; wouldn't you agree? Well
maybe He has allowed Ike to speak this way to show you something about
Himself. Is Ike greater than He? No disrespect intended Ike.
The Lord said He would never again drown the earth and He placed a rainbow
in the earth as a witness to His word. Instead He is going to fry it. :-).
God is not always what you would expect. His thoughts not our thoughts, His
ways not our ways. You have to keep open. With God all things are
possible.
Linda Lee
wrote:
Well good. And Yeshua` said he is "the way, the truth, and the life",
and there is no lie in him.
So seeing Ike twist the text so he can claim Yeshua` lied (initially
in response to me quoting Paul as speaking of his "lie"), and you to
not really be interested in why Ike keeps repeating this lie about the
Messiah is rather upsetting and doesn't really look like you're too
interested in the truth.
Your attitude towards this sort of belies your sign-off "In them is no
darkness at all".
Linda Lee
wrote:
I have discussed it with Ike, and he's called me spiritual whore and
every other name in the book. The verse he is referring to is Joh 7:8
Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time
is not yet full come.
Joh 7:9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in
Galilee.
Joh 7:10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up
unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
There is NO LIE in there, and Ike only brought up Yeshua` lying in
defense to a comment I made about Paul. It's unconscionable for anyone
professing to follow the Messiah to put up with this LIE against him
quietly. And you all are except for Qadosh. I'm appalled, and it's an
eye-opening and unwelcome way to start the new year.
If you were really interested in the truth and really loved the
Messiah, you would care if he were being called a liar.
Yeshua` is The Way, the TRUTH, and the Life.
Linda Lee
And if you're talking about having mercy on Ike, I will too, AS SOON
AS he either retracts his statement or states he will cease from
calling my God a liar. And not until then.
Yeshua` is the Way, the TRUTH, and the Life
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
> On Jan 14, 3:42 am, "Michael Christ" <christianl...@westnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>> Linda wrote:
>> > Why are you trying to turn this around? Ike is the one who asserts
>> > "Jesus lied" and he implies God lied in the OT as well.
>>
>> I am not out to get anyone, all I am interested in is truth Linda.
>>
>> Mike
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> My Sons are born of Me
>> They are My Spirit.
>> In them is no darkness at all.
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
> Well good. And Yeshua` said he is "the way, the truth, and the life",
> and there is no lie in him.
>
> So seeing Ike twist the text so he can claim Yeshua` lied (initially
> in response to me quoting Paul as speaking of his "lie"),
And as I thoroughly explained, the two uses of "yet" is NOT IN original
manuscripts, and as I cited, modern editions have removed the first one,
because it wasn't there--it got extrapolated into the text by those who were
ALSO confused by the fact that Jesus could tell a fib if necessary to His
cause, as the lie was NOT detrimental to anyone, and He did it to PROTECT
Himself and His Disciples from the Jews who were looking for Him, and to
further the cause of the Gospel, NOT to take advantage of anyone.
This was ABSOLUTELY no different than when David feigned insanity to keep
the Philistines from killing him.
But this simple-minded Pharisee woman CAN'T GET PAST the point that a "LIE"
is NOT automatically "a sin." In fact, that Jesus DID do this demonstrates
the principles He was teaching the Disciples when He told them to be "as
wise as serpents and as harmless as doves" which you noted elsewhere.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Nonsense: The passage doesn't have A THING to do with Paul's visitation.
Paul SAID what He was referring to, which is exactly what the prophets
referred to--NO MAN, apart from Jesus, has "clean lips," and they are ALL
liars when it comes to the things of God.
For this reason, God sent coals from His altar to "cleanse" Isaiah's lips,
signifying that GOD makes the words of men clean, NOT by their knowledge,
but by HIS GRACE.
(Which explains how Peter could be such a duffuss sometimes and STILL be the
head disciple--if we were to go by Peter's errors, he would have been
unjustified LONG ago. Good thing the Gospel is advanced DESPITE man's
errors, which is the subject of Paul's theme.)
This is the EXACT same concept Paul alludes to about his "lie," which YOU
totally take out of context and misconstrue to make Paul the lair when YOU
are the liar, no two ways about it.
Romans 3:1-18
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of
circumcision?
Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the
oracles of God.
For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of
God without effect?
God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is
written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest
overcome when thou art judged.
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall
we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance?
(I speak as a man)
God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his
glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And not rather, (as we be
slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that
good may come? whose damnation is just.
What then? are we better than they?
No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that
they are all under sin.
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none
that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone
out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that
doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their
tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose
mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood:
Destruction and misery are in their ways: the way of peace have they not
known: There is no fear of God before their eyes.
WHERE IS THERE ONE STATEMENT ABOUT PAUL'S VISITATION IN THIS PASSAGE?
(And you BETTER find it in this passage, or you have wholeheartedly given
yourself over to bearing false witness against one of the Lord's
messengers.)
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
[snip]
> Why are you so rude to women, you male chauvinist PIG?
Hey, I'm an unbiased rebuker, just like Jesus--I'm rude to everyone who does
dumb things or makes stupid statements, regardless of gender, even if it's a
disciple.
So here we've caught you in ANOTHER lie--I'm NOT a male chauvinist pig.
I'm just a plain old pig, you warthog.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:13ojd63...@corp.supernews.com...
> Michael Christ wrote:
>>> Okay, only asking what you think, what about 'I will pour out of my
>>> Spirit upon all flesh', do you think that there will be a large harvest
>>> of souls for the Lord or will it continue in 'many are called, but few
>>> are chosen' or maybe there will be a large pouring out in the sense that
>>> the world will know that God is real, but not necessarily leading to
>>> some huge repentance?
>
> Ike wrote:
>> God does NOT always pour out His Spirit to save. Take, for instance, King
>> Saul, whose ability to prophecy in no way kept him out of trouble. Also
>> note the Ciaphas also prophesied correctly "better that one man should
>> die than a whole nation should perish," which was RIGHT, but not in the
>> context he meant.
>
> Amen. And amen.
>
> Ike wrote:
>> I would conclude that "many are called but few are chosen" will continue
>> right through the End of the Age and the Millennial Kingdom, as proven by
>> Satan's ability to STILL incite a rebellion when the dragon is released
>> after the thousand years.
>
>> There is no accounting for stupidity, huh?
>
> It is his nature; can't help himself. Like the story of the scorpion and
> the fox...
>
> Once long ago in the vast lands of the desert there was a great and vast
> river that had to be crossed for animals to seek food and water elsewhere
> in the desert. As it was on this day Fox had come to the point where it
> had to cross the river in its travels. As it stood contemplating the best
> way to cross the river safely Fox's life long enemy Scorpion came upon it
> and began to talk to Fox.
> "Fox as I was walking along the river bank looking for food I noticed a
> particularily easy place to cross the river where the water is not so deep
> and not so swift. As it is I would like to cross over myself also but as I
> am so small it would be impossible. Would you be willing to take me across
> if I show you this place to cross the river?" asked Scorpion.
>
> "Why should I take you across? How could I possibly trust you will not
> sting me on the way across as we have been life long enemies?" asked Fox.
>
> "Why would I sting you? For if I stung you it would mean you would drown
> then both of us would die." replied Scorpion.
>
> Fox thought this over for a bit while carefully watching Scorpion with a
> distrustful eye. Eventually Fox said, "Show me where the place is and I
> will take you across."
>
> "First place me on your back and then I will show you. For otherwise you
> may jump in and leave me behind once I show you." replied Scorpion.
>
> Fox thought this over for a bit while carefully watching Scorpion with a
> distrustful eye. Then walked over to Scorpion and allowed him to climb
> onto its back. Scorpion directed Fox to where the river was not so deep
> nor so swift such that it was a safer place to cross over. As Fox was
> swimming across the river and had reached the middle of the river Fox felt
> a sharp stinging sensation on its back and realized it had been stung by
> Scorpion. Fox cried out, "How could you sting me we shall both drown now?"
>
> The Scorpion shrugged and said, 'Its just my nature."
>
> (Cut and pasted from somewhere)
That's not a bad story, and very similar to the meaning locked up in the
name of Jesus' opposite number, Maher-Shalal-Hashbaz.
The name basically means "the hasty predator becomes the prey."
It typifies something akin to a snake (Satan) preying on a mouse (the
believer), not knowing that a great Eagle (Jesus) is bearing down on him to
take HIM as the prey.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
[snip]
> Believe it or not, lying Ike is such a moron that he believes that all
> of alt.messianic is a cult newsgroup apparently composed mainly of
> Messianic Jews or Messianic Christians when it is almost entirely a
> Pauline Christian newsgroup.
Oh, so you're just a crazy Jewess WITHOUT any support group.
That would explain the P.M.S. [Pauline anti-Messenger Syndrome]. Or would
that be P.A.M.S?
Nevertheless, the crazy Jewish Paul-attackers keep coming out of THAT group
into the rest, based on nutty Jewish anti-Christian interpretations of the
Bible such as yours.
Maybe you should form your own group: alt.p.a.m.s.
While it would fit you to a T, I believe alt.p.m.s is already taken.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
[snip]
> You sound just like your damned idol Paul now. There is NO DIFFERENCE
> between saying Christ lied and saying he's a liar.
Typical small-minded Pharisee's response.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Now, see, if you hadn't spent so much time ragging me instead of reading the
post, you would know that I already posted up several citations of OTHER
people being titled "Apostle" in the New Testament APART from, and even BY,
the original twelve, signifying that the office of Apostles was supposed to
continue in the church.
Ac 14:14 Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent
their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,
Ro 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who
are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
That's four.
Then, of course, there were the seven men whom the original apostles chose
to promote to their old positions as their numbers shrank, and as they need
to free themselves from "waiting tables," including the marvelous Stephen.
Oh, wait...
1Ths 2:1-6 [ed.]
ś Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus...For neither at any time used WE
flattering words, as ye know, nor a cloke of covetousness; God is witness:
Nor of men sought WE glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when WE might
have been burdensome, AS THE APOSTLES OF CHRIST.
There's two more.
Oh, wait, where have we heard that name Silvanus before?
1 Peter 5:12
1Pe 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you...
There's that connectivity of witnesses again that you deny, Mark, Luke,
Paul, and Peter all testifying to one another...
That John calls the original twelve "the twelve apostles of the Lamb" in no
way denies the continuing of apostolic succession (although Jesus warned the
boys not to take that TOO rigidly.)
Ike
Bucky Breeder
>
>> I alluded to this when I wrote the question about
>> which group Paul would belong to,
Nancy Rudins <nru...@ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote in
news:13olurh...@news.supernews.com:
>
> The Beatles, of course.
>
> Where is the scriptural foundation for a second
> or third or more generation of apostles?
>
> Kind regards,
> Nancy
Acts 1:2-1:9 & Acts 2:1, et seq.
--
Linda Lee
> � Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus...For neither at any time used WE
> flattering words, as ye know, nor a cloke of covetousness; God is witness:
> Nor of men sought WE glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when WE might
> have been burdensome, AS THE APOSTLES OF CHRIST.
DEMONIC SWINE,
How stupid are you? Paul is saying th apostles of Christ had been
burdensome to them, whereas he was claiming he was not being
burdensome (i.e. keeping them under bondage [to the law] as he accused
the chiefest apostles of Yeshua` of doing to the Gentiles) in Romans
11. He is also accusing them of being hypocritically deceptive just as
he did in Galatians when he said there was dissimulation (hypocrisy)
among them and of putting upon them the burden of circumcision so they
could 'glory' in their flesh.
I really don't have time to hold your hand and explain every sentence
to you. Post to someone else. I'm tired of hearing your demonic LIES.
I guess I really shouldn't blame you. The condition you're in is
typical of those who have come under demonic influence by following
the false apostle - the apPauling Paul. I should blame Paul and the
Devil who influenced him and gave him his power.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
[snip]
> Now, see, if you hadn't spent so much time ragging me instead of reading
> the
> post, you would know that I already posted up several citations of OTHER
> people being titled "Apostle" in the New Testament APART from, and even
> BY,
> the original twelve, signifying that the office of Apostles was supposed
> to
> continue in the church.
>
> Ac 14:14 Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent
> their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,
>
> Ro 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners,
> who
> are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
>
> That's four.
>
> Then, of course, there were the seven men whom the original apostles chose
> to promote to their old positions as their numbers shrank, and as they
> need
> to free themselves from "waiting tables," including the marvelous Stephen.
>
> Oh, wait...
>
> 1Ths 2:1-6 [ed.]
>
> ? Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus...For neither at any time used WE
> flattering words, as ye know, nor a cloke of covetousness; God is witness:
> Nor of men sought WE glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when WE
> might
> have been burdensome, AS THE APOSTLES OF CHRIST.
> DEMONIC SWINE,
> How stupid are you? Paul is saying th apostles of Christ had been
> burdensome to them,
Where did you learn to read?
There isn't even anything in the passage ABOUT the twelve apostles.
Paul said that, AS THE APOSTLES OF CHRIST (he and Barnabas), they made no
demands on the Thessalonians that would have been A BURDEN TO THEM.
You don't even have the basic reading comprehension skills of a third
grader.
Here you're calling ME stupid and it's becoming painfully obvious to
everyone involved that YOU are the stupid idiot that can't read basic
English.
Ike
P.S. Oh, yeah: You STILL didn't deal with the fact that various passages of
the New Testament, citied above, name OTHER people as Apostles besides the
original twelve.
P.S.S. FIX YOUR DAMN NEWSREADER!
Michael Christ
> That's not a bad story, and very similar to the meaning locked up in the
> name of Jesus' opposite number, Maher-Shalal-Hashbaz.
>
> The name basically means "the hasty predator becomes the prey."
>
> It typifies something akin to a snake (Satan) preying on a mouse (the
> believer), not knowing that a great Eagle (Jesus) is bearing down on him
> to take HIM as the prey.
:-).
It takes great faith to be a mouse then. :-).
Michael Christ
> Why are you trying to turn this around? Ike is the one who asserts
> "Jesus lied" and he implies God lied in the OT as well.
Michael Christ wrote:
>> I am not out to get anyone, all I am interested in is truth Linda.
Linda wrote:
> Well good. And Yeshua` said he is "the way, the truth, and the life",
> and there is no lie in him.
> So seeing Ike twist the text so he can claim Yeshua` lied (initially
> in response to me quoting Paul as speaking of his "lie"), and you to
> not really be interested in why Ike keeps repeating this lie about the
> Messiah is rather upsetting and doesn't really look like you're too
> interested in the truth.
> Your attitude towards this sort of belies your sign-off "In them is no
> darkness at all".
With respect.
So, am I a liar in your eyes now Linda? Is that the way, truth and life for
me, what your perceptions are?
I can see your perspective and I can see Ike's. He would be a fool to call
the Lord a liar, he knows that. I can see in the Spirit he is not calling
the Lord a liar. If Ike did I would say something about it. The Lord is
not focussed on whether you are right, or Ike is right, or you are both
right or both wrong, it is how you treat one another that matters to Him.
I know that sounds mundane, boring, and low priority, but it is everything.
Nothing is going to happen or change unless He gets what He wants, and until
He does, its round and round and round in the same paddock.
Love is the answer, and has always been the answer. Show me the truth of
God in you and love your enemy.
Anyone that doesn't *do* God's will is a liar, and calls Him a liar, Linda.
Michael Christ
> I have discussed it with Ike, and he's called me spiritual whore and
> every other name in the book.
So, what does that matter? Besides the Lord has read (is He ignorant?) what
you have called him. Simply, forgive him or condemn yourself.
Linda wrote:
> The verse he is referring to is Joh 7:8
> Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time
> is not yet full come.
> Joh 7:9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in
> Galilee.
> Joh 7:10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up
> unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
> There is NO LIE in there, and Ike only brought up Yeshua` lying in
> defense to a comment I made about Paul. It's unconscionable for anyone
> professing to follow the Messiah to put up with this LIE against him
> quietly. And you all are except for Qadosh. I'm appalled, and it's an
> eye-opening and unwelcome way to start the new year.
> If you were really interested in the truth and really loved the
> Messiah, you would care if he were being called a liar.
> Yeshua` is The Way, the TRUTH, and the Life.
The Lord is not offended by anyone...like a lamb to the slaughter. He gets
called all manner of evil things and is besmirched everyday in the deeds of
men who do things that are so-called done in His name.
There is more going on here than words.
You can dismiss what I say with all kinds of reasoning, but that is not
going to change the way, truth and the life; love is the answer. He is
interested in love, Linda. You can't love Him without loving everyone He
went to the cross for.
I have to live on my knees, and rightfully so before the majesty of His
will, just as
you do.
If you regard truth as highly as you say, then walk in love and not offense.
The road is not narrow by reason of human resistance but by submission to
His will.
Michael Christ
was wont to manifest a great sense of her own meanness and dependence.
She often expressed an exceeding compassion, and pitiful love, which she
found in her heart towards persons in a Christless condition. This was
sometimes so strong, that, as she was passing by such in the streets, or
those that she feared were such, she would be overcome by the sight of
them. She once said, that she longed to have the whole world saved; she
wanted, as it were, to pull them all to her, she could not bear to have
one lost.
She had great longings to die, that she might be with Christ: which
increased until she thought she did not know how to be patient to wait
till God's time. But once, when she felt those longings, she thought
with herself, If I long to die, why do I go to physicians? Whence she
concluded that her longings for death were not well regulated. After
this she often put it to herself, which she should choose, whether to
live or to die, to be sick or to be well; and she found she could not
tell, till at last she found herself disposed to say these words: I am
quite willing to live, and quite willing to die; quite willing to be
sick, and quite willing to be well; and quite willing for any thing that
God will bring upon me! And then, said she, I felt myself perfectly
easy, in a full submission to the will of God. She then lamented much,
that she had been so eager in her longings for death, as it argued want
of such a resi
Michael Christ
overwhelmed nor carried away, but are immovably fixed, not standing but
seated on a low and secure base, whence they do not rise before the light,
but, having rested in peace, stretch out their hands to Him, who must lift
them up, and make them stand upright and firm in the porches of the holy
Jerusalem! There pride can no longer assail them nor cast them down; and yet
they weep, not to see all those perishable things swept away by the
torrents, but at the remembrance of their loved country, the heavenly
Jerusalem, which they remember without ceasing during their prolonged exile.
459. The rivers of Babylon rush and fall and sweep away.
O holy Zion, where all is firm and nothing falls!
We must sit upon the waters, not under them or in them, but on them; and not
standing but seated; being seated to be humble, and being above them to be
secure. But we shall stand in the porches of Jerusalem.
Let us see if this pleasure is stable or transitory; if it pass away, it is
a river of Babylon.
460. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, pride, etc.--There are
three orders of things: the flesh, the spirit, and the will. The carnal are
the rich and kings; they have the body as their object. Inquirers and
scientists; they have the mind as their object. The wise; they have
righteousness as their object.
God must reign over all, and all men must be brought back to Him. In things
of the flesh lust reigns specially; in intellectual matters, inquiry
specially; in wisdom, pride specially. Not that a man cannot boast of wealth
or knowledge, but it is not the place for pride; for in granting to a man
that he is learned, it is easy to convince him that he is wrong to be proud.
The proper place for pride is in wisdom, for it cannot be granted to a man
that he has made himself wise, and that he is wrong to be proud; for that is
right. Now God alone gives wisdom, and that is why Qui gloriatur, in Domino
glorietur.74
461. The three lu
Michael Christ
265. Faith indeed tells what the senses do not tell, but not the contrary of
what they see. It is above them and not contrary to them.
266. How many stars have telescopes revealed to us which did not exist for
our philosophers of old! We freely attack Holy Scripture on the great number
of stars, saying, "There are only one thousand and twenty-eight, we know
it." There is grass on the earth, we see it--from the moon we would not see
it--and on the grass are leaves, and in these leaves are small animals; but
after that no more. O presumptuous man! The compounds are composed of
elements, and the elements not. O presumptuous man! Here is a fine
reflection. We must not say that there is anything which we do not see. We
must then talk like others, but not think like them.
267. The last proceeding of reason is to recognise that there is an infinity
of things which are beyond it. It is but feeble if it does not see so far as
to know this. But if natural things are beyond it, what will be said of
supernatural?
268. Submission.-
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Dogmatists, Academicians, etc.
The Christian religion alone has been able to cure these two vices, not by
expelling the one through means of the other according to the wisdom of the
world, but by expelling both according to the simplicity of the Gospel. For
it teaches the righteous that it raises them even to a participation in
divinity itself; that in this lofty state they still carry the source of all
corruption, which renders them during all their life subject to error,
misery, death, and sin; and it proclaims to the most ungodly that they are
capable of the grace of their Redeemer. So making those tremble whom it
justifies, and consoling those whom it condemns, religion so justly tempers
fear with hope through that double capacity of grace and of sin, common to
all, that it humbles infinitely more than reason alone can do, but without
despair; and it exalts infinitely more than natural pride, but without
inflating; thus making it evident that alone being exempt from error and
vice, it alone fulfils the duty of instructing and correcting men.
Who, then, can refuse to believe and adore this heavenly light? For is it
not clearer than day that we perceive within ourselves ineffaceable marks of
excellence? And
Michael Christ
entreated him to let him and his family come and live at his house: and
had much more talk of the same nature, whereby she manifested bowels of
compassion to the poor.
She has manifested great love to her minister: particularly when I
returned from my long journey for my health, the last fall. When she
heard of it, she appeared very joyful at the news, and told the children
of it, with an elevated voice, as the most joyful tidings; repeating it
over and over. Mr. Edwards is come home! Mr. Edwards is come home! She
still continues very constant in secret prayer, so far as can be
observed, for she seems to have no desire that others should observe her
when she retires, being a child of a reserved temper. Every night,
before she goes to bed, she will say her catechism, and will by no means
miss. She never forgot it but once, and then, after she was a-bed,
thought of it, and cried out in tears, I han't said my catechism! and
would not be quieted till her mother asked her the catechism as she lay
in bed. She sometimes appears to be in doubt about the condition of her
soul; and when asked, whether she thinks that she is prepared for death,
speaks something doubtfu
Qadosh Stephanos
<lindag...@juno.com> wrote:
>Don't you mean - But "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." said: Jesus did "lie" as
>the occasion called for. ?
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." is exceeding the righteousness of mankind.
You need to be mindful, that the people of Paul are sculptors God.
It's Ok for Paul people to lie. This is the moral of Christianity.
;-)
guardian Snow
wrote:
> You can dismiss what I say with all kinds of reasoning, but that is not
> going to change the way, truth and the life; love is the answer. He is
> interested in love, Linda. You can't love Him without loving everyone He
> went to the cross for.
Thats not true. While we are to love our enemies as much as any other
man, we can love יהושע and still fall short of his teachings, it's the
very reason he did die for our sins. Having love for יהושע is not
tied to loving everyone.
Mat 10:36 and a man’s enemies are those of his own household.
Mat 10:37 “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of
Me, and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.
We are to place him first in our hearts and everybody else is second.
Mat 10:34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I
did not come to bring peace but a sword,1 Footnote: 1In Lk. 12:51 the
word “division” is used, while “sword” has the same meaning here.
We are not at peace with the world.
Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from the heaven saying, “Come out
of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of
her plagues.1 Footnote: 1Jer. 51:6 & 45.
Shalom,
Snow
Take control of your consistent emotions and begin to consciously and
deliberately reshape your daily experience of life.
Tony Robbins
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:LCQie.4288$E7.2063@trndny01...
???
I didn't write this.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
> Ike wrote:
>> That's not a bad story, and very similar to the meaning locked up in the
>> name of Jesus' opposite number, Maher-Shalal-Hashbaz.
>>
>> The name basically means "the hasty predator becomes the prey."
>>
>> It typifies something akin to a snake (Satan) preying on a mouse (the
>> believer), not knowing that a great Eagle (Jesus) is bearing down on him
>> to take HIM as the prey.
>
> :-).
>
> It takes great faith to be a mouse then. :-).
LOL
That's funny. I never thought about the "third party's" perspective in the
story, but you're right--it DOES take great faith to be the mouse.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
> Linda wrote:
>> Why are you trying to turn this around? Ike is the one who asserts
>> "Jesus lied" and he implies God lied in the OT as well.
>
> Michael Christ wrote:
>>> I am not out to get anyone, all I am interested in is truth Linda.
>
> Linda wrote:
>> Well good. And Yeshua` said he is "the way, the truth, and the life",
>> and there is no lie in him.
>
>> So seeing Ike twist the text so he can claim Yeshua` lied (initially
>> in response to me quoting Paul as speaking of his "lie"), and you to
>> not really be interested in why Ike keeps repeating this lie about the
>> Messiah is rather upsetting and doesn't really look like you're too
>> interested in the truth.
>
>> Your attitude towards this sort of belies your sign-off "In them is no
>> darkness at all".
>
> With respect.
>
> So, am I a liar in your eyes now Linda? Is that the way, truth and life
> for me, what your perceptions are?
>
> I can see your perspective and I can see Ike's. He would be a fool to
> call the Lord a liar, he knows that. I can see in the Spirit he is not
> calling the Lord a liar. If Ike did I would say something about it. The
> Lord is not focussed on whether you are right, or Ike is right, or you are
> both right or both wrong, it is how you treat one another that matters to
> Him.
On this last point I respectfully disagree: Jesus was quick to jump on
damnable heresies coming from the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians, even
when they came from His own Disciples.
So was Paul.
So, no, how one treated one another was NOT the whole story when confronting
an obvious enemy.
(And is there anyone any more obvious an enemy than someone screaming at the
entire Christian community--past, present, AND future--that Paul was a
"liar" and "false apostle?")
guardian Snow
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:LCQie.4288$E7.2063@trndny01...
I got hacked also.. I thought the style looked familiar and if you
look around Ike.. You'll see it's an obvious style that isn't yours.
I was hacked too... Google is having some interesting security
issues. Good thought adding net abuse to the post:) That would have
to be you:)
Take care Ike.
Shalom,
Snow
Ambition never is in a greater hurry that I; it merely keeps pace with
circumstances and with my general way of thinking.
Napoleon Bonaparte
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:oa6oo3dhkjp0cotqn...@4ax.com...
Thus says the other lunatic from the fringe.
Ike
guardian Snow
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
Or at least somebody very self righteous. We disagree so often Ike
it's ironic to have something in common with you:)
"Brain Damage" by Pink Floyd
The lunatic is on the grass
The lunatic is on the grass
Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs
Got to keep the loonies on the path
The lunatic is in the hall
The lunatics are in my hall
The paper holds their folded faces to the floor
And every day the paper boy brings more
And if the dam breaks open many years too soon
And if there is no room upon the hill
And if your head explodes with dark forbodings too
I'll see you on the dark side of the moon
Shalom,
Snow
Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever.
Napoleon Bonaparte
Michael Christ
> You can dismiss what I say with all kinds of reasoning, but that is not
> going to change the way, truth and the life; love is the answer. He is
> interested in love, Linda. You can't love Him without loving everyone He
> went to the cross for.
Guardian Snow wrote:
>Thats not true.
Yes it is Guardian.
(snip)
When you look to the scriptures to find justification for diminshing the
requirement for love, you are no longer looking at the scriptures.
Michael Christ
>> I can see your perspective and I can see Ike's. He would be a fool to
>> call the Lord a liar, he knows that. I can see in the Spirit he is not
>> calling the Lord a liar. If Ike did I would say something about it. The
>> Lord is not focussed on whether you are right, or Ike is right, or you
>> are both right or both wrong, it is how you treat one another that
>> matters to Him.
Ike wrote:
> On this last point I respectfully disagree: Jesus was quick to jump on
> damnable heresies coming from the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians,
> even when they came from His own Disciples.
>
> So was Paul.
>
> So, no, how one treated one another was NOT the whole story when
> confronting an obvious enemy.
>
> (And is there anyone any more obvious an enemy than someone screaming at
> the entire Christian community--past, present, AND future--that Paul was a
> "liar" and "false apostle?")
And respectfully replying. Lets fly up higher together.
It is not going to change anything Ike. God is God. Truth is truth.
No-one is misled by a lie unless they have chosen to believe a lie. Little
heresies, big heresies, little lies, big lies, little pretences, big
pretences, whatever, they are all deterrents, distractions, hindrances to
what should be happening...love.
Are you not a sinner, is Linda not a sinner? Well, what is the story then?
Is Linda's sin diminished by her being right about something, or vice versa?
Well what's it all about then? Are there degrees in righteousness based on
the more right a person's theology is over another? No, these things, these
arguments, that so obviously divide people who have been called by God, like
you and Linda, are snares that are laid for many.
Everything is raised up by the Lord to perfect all things in their time and
place and He bring all things together for good. A Christian's priority is
not to defend Christianity, but to live it, and to live it is to love first
and foremost without reservation. If that is not the foundation then all
the righteous indignation about what is holy, right as they may be, is just
a waste of time and done in the name of naught.
The Lord went to the cross because He desired that you love God/Him and for
you to love Linda, and Linda to love you. That is it. Can a few words on a
newsgroup compare to the thrashing that was handed out to Him? Yet, He said
forgive them Father for they know not what you do. Do you know what you do
to one another when you strike at the heart of one another?
Come on there is a higher way, and you both know it in your hearts. And
that is what ruins what you can be, the fact that you deny what you know to
be true by trying to justify that which is already failing and fails.
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
> Michael Christ wrote:
>>> I can see your perspective and I can see Ike's. He would be a fool to
>>> call the Lord a liar, he knows that. I can see in the Spirit he is not
>>> calling the Lord a liar. If Ike did I would say something about it.
>>> The Lord is not focussed on whether you are right, or Ike is right, or
>>> you are both right or both wrong, it is how you treat one another that
>>> matters to Him.
>
> Ike wrote:
>> On this last point I respectfully disagree: Jesus was quick to jump on
>> damnable heresies coming from the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians,
>> even when they came from His own Disciples.
>>
>> So was Paul.
>>
>> So, no, how one treated one another was NOT the whole story when
>> confronting an obvious enemy.
>>
>> (And is there anyone any more obvious an enemy than someone screaming at
>> the entire Christian community--past, present, AND future--that Paul was
>> a "liar" and "false apostle?")
>
> And respectfully replying. Lets fly up higher together.
So Jesus wasn't "flying high enough" when He ripped the Pharisees,
Sadducees, and Herodians to shreds? Or drove out the money-changers by
violence? Or whirled on His best friend and said "get thee behind me,
Satan?"
No, friend, but yours is the distorted, one-dimensional image of Christ
prevalent in the churches today, which have no fight left in them, only
empty platitudes and wishy-washy feel-good theologies.
Sometimes, going "up" means getting down in the trenches and duking it out,
which is what the second coming will be all about--we've seen the
compassionate side of Christ, and had our chance to deal with that aspect of
Him. Now comes Jesus in the OTHER aspect, and it's going to be bloody as
hell...literally.
And Linda Lee is only a living precursor of the enemies of Christ to come.
Ike
Nancy Rudins
> "Nancy Rudins" <nru...@ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
> news:13olurh...@news.supernews.com...
>> H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> I alluded to this when I wrote the question about which group Paul would
>>> belong to,
>>
>>
>> Where is the scriptural foundation for a second or third or more
>> generation of apostles?
>
> already posted because some jerk shows up late and doesn't check out the
> previous threads of a conversation BEFORE jumping into the conversation.
>
> You want the evidence?
>
> YOU go back and find it.
>
> Ike
>
>
There is no evidence. That's the error the papacy perpetuated;
that is, the papal lineage could be traced back to the Apostle
Peter.
Kind regards,
Nancy
--
E = F-flat
Musician's Theory of Relativity
Nancy Rudins nru...@ncsa.uiuc.edu
Linda Lee
wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:25 pm, "Michael Christ" <christianl...@westnet.com.au>
wrote:
I do not dismiss what you say at all. I would ask you though to
explain to me why you don't also tell Ike (who says Christ lied and
calls me the beast, spiritual whore, cultish whore, etc. etc.) to
"walk in love and not offense". I really want a response to that and
nothing else is necessary. Otherwise, you look terribly hypocritical
to me and appear to just be siding with Ike, which you've claimed you
don't want to do.
Love is expressed by not harming someone or making them suffer. This
is a debate forum and Ike routinely chooses to use a debate 'method'
that involves calling names, so that is how I respond to him. That
plus the fact that he keeps insisting Christ lied, which is
infuriating coming from someone who professes to be a believer and
follower of Christ because it makes them look FALSE.
Since I think the theology Ike promotes will result in the death of
the spirit of anyone who believes them, I feel a duty to oppose his
theology.
People who don't love their fellow man make the news all the time, so
much so I can't hardly stand to watch it. For instance, I caught a
glimpse of it today and was confronted with parents who had beaten
their two year old child to death.
That is the extreme, but there are two kinds of people; those who want
others to feel good, and those who want others to feel badly.
However, as obnoxious and misled as he is, if Ike were around me and
were in need of food, water, clothing, or help in getting medical
assistance or anything like that, I know I would have to do it because
I would feel guilty if I let someone, anyone, suffer. And I live that.
And in that way I love all people, even those I find false,
aggravating, or assaultive -- including unholy swine.
Linda Lee
wrote:
> Linda wrote:
> > Why are you trying to turn this around? Ike is the one who asserts
> > "Jesus lied" and he implies God lied in the OT as well.
> Michael Christ wrote:
> >> I am not out to get anyone, all I am interested in is truth Linda.
> Linda wrote:
> > Well good. And Yeshua` said he is "the way, the truth, and the life",
> > and there is no lie in him.
> > So seeing Ike twist the text so he can claim Yeshua` lied (initially
> > in response to me quoting Paul as speaking of his "lie"), and you to
> > not really be interested in why Ike keeps repeating this lie about the
> > Messiah is rather upsetting and doesn't really look like you're too
> > interested in the truth.
> > Your attitude towards this sort of belies your sign-off "In them is no
> > darkness at all".
>
> With respect.
>
> So, am I a liar in your eyes now Linda? Is that the way, truth and life for
> me, what your perceptions are?
>
> I can see your perspective and I can see Ike's. He would be a fool to call
> the Lord a liar, he knows that.
> I can see in the Spirit he is not calling
> the Lord a liar.
That's crazy. Now rather than just being uninterested that Ike
repeatedly says Christ lied, you try to claim 'in spirit' he isn't
REALLY saying that. He IS.
Ike will tell you he IS saying Christ lied, but Paul (who admits he
lied) is not lying. Apparently, what you can 'see' is Ike is a Paul
follower, and that's all that's necessary. Paul followers are allowed
to do anything.
> If Ike did I would say something about it.
Incredible. You're being false. I'm not seeing much light emanating
from you right now. Not only did you begin by not saying anything
about it, but when I pointed that omission out to you, you deny he
said it 'in spirit'.
> The Lord is
> not focussed on whether you are right, or Ike is right, or you are both
> right or both wrong, it is how you treat one another that matters to Him.
>
> I know that sounds mundane, boring, and low priority, but it is everything.
>
> Nothing is going to happen or change unless He gets what He wants, and until
> He does, its round and round and round in the same paddock.
>
> Love is the answer, and has always been the answer. Show me the truth of
> God in you and love your enemy.
>
> Anyone that doesn't *do* God's will is a liar, and calls Him a liar, Linda.
>
> Mike
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> My Sons are born of Me
> They are My Spirit.
> In them is no darkness at all.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why do you use the nic Michael Christ ?
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6ab79703-e95c-4c7d...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jan 14, 12:34 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> > <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
>
> >> > On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:51:42 GMT, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> >> > <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >> >>FACT: The title "Apostle" was used for OTHER people in the New
> >> >>Testament
>
> >> > Name more than three.
>
> >> I already did, when I said it the first time.
>
>
> >> Ike
>
> >> the
> >> point.
>
> > CRETIN,
>
> > Revelation lists only twelves apostles of the Lamb. Why don't you
> > argue with John who wrote that? I think John knew of Paul since he
> > warns of people like him with the antichrist spirit repeatedly.
>
> > Surely with your incredible spirituality and being among Paul's elect
> > you can communicate with John in the spirit like Paul claims he did
> > with the Christ. LOL.
>
You're just not getting it are you? I've told you before, since you
insist on calling Christ a liar (i.e. saying he lied), I have no
further interest in rational debate on any topic with you. When I see
a post from you with the words in big letters that Christ DID NOT LIE,
I'm open to debate.
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:LCQie.4288$E7.2063@trndny01...
That is weird. It has the same email address on your profile. Others
(Fred Stover, Mistylien, and various others) have claimed they also
didn't post things under their nics.
Just a couple of days ago, I received an email saying an email they
claimed I had sent containing a short story to a porno-type site had
been rejected because it was missing a certain word (and I didn't send
it and never heard of the site before). It had the title from one of
these threads in the Subject line of the return email. My son thinks
it's some kind of worm virus on Google Groups.
In a case like yours (posts attributed to you under your profile), it
looks to me like someone's hacked into your server or Google Groups
(where I post from) and obtained email addresses and password codes
used to log into the server or Google Groups. (They wouldn't need a
password to send an email from anyone's email address.)
Nancy Rudins
>> H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> I alluded to this when I wrote the question about
>>> which group Paul would belong to,
>
>
>> The Beatles, of course.
>>
>> Where is the scriptural foundation for a second
>> or third or more generation of apostles?
>>
>> Nancy
>
>
> Acts 1:2-1:9 & Acts 2:1, et seq.
>
The twelve apostles were carefully chosen by Jesus and he
took great care watching over them. He prayed for Peter even
during his own hour of trial; he appealed to Peter to feed his
lambs and sheep; he was willing to demonstrate the fact of his
resurrection to Thomas. Of all, he lost none except Judas, the
son of perdition. The selection of Matthias cannot be recognized
as in any sense of the word the Lord's selection. He was, without
doubt, a good man, but he was chosen by the other eleven without
the Lord's authority. They were instructed to tarry at Jerusalem
and wait for the endowment of the holy spirit at Pentecost. During
this waiting period, and before they received the holy spirit, they
cast lots and chose Matthias to take the place of Judas.
The Lord did not reprove them for their undesigned meddling with
his arrangement but simply ignored their choice and in due time
brought forth the apostle Paul stating "He is a chosen vessel
unto me."
Other disciples (followers of Christ) were beloved of the twelve
and of the Lord; these include Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and others
named and unnamed, but the twelve chosen by the Lord were so specially
set apart from the other disciples. There is no scriptural evidence
that there are layered generations of the twelve apostles. This is
an error that befell the papacy by claiming that their apostolic
authority could be traced back to Peter as the first pope.
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Michael Christ" <christianl...@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
Yes, Eikenboob, there is someone "more obviously an enemy" -- there is
someone like you who claims my God lied. But since you're such a PAUL-
WORSHIPPER it is OKAY for you to claim Christ lied, but it is not okay
for me to quote Paul saying he lied.
Your statement is just proving once again who it is you really worship
- Paul.
You're so dumb and demonized that I'm just amazed at the extent of it.
You're a spiritual whore, a blind guide, a fool, and a hypocrite who
condones Paul's lie and justifies branding Christ a liar.
Paul is the way to HELL, the LIE, and DEATH.
Yeshua` is the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE.
CHRIST DID NOT LIE. YOU LIE. AND PAUL LIED -- JUST AS HE SAID.
Linda Lee
<xeickleberrybo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Qadosh Stephanos" <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
>
>
> > ;-)
>
> Thus says the other lunatic from the fringe.
>
> Ike
Thus says the looneytoon who lies that Christ lied and then lies that
Paul didn't lie.
CHRIST DID NOT LIE. PAUL LIED, AND YOU LIE, EIKENBOOB.
Linda Lee
So YOU DON'T think Paul lied? Amazing. This has been an incredible
week. Why have you been telling me otherwise?
Rom 3:7 PAUL says, "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through
my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?"
PAUL is the way to HELL, the LIE, and DEATH.
Linda Lee
Applause !
Michael Christ
> So Jesus wasn't "flying high enough" when He ripped the Pharisees,
> Sadducees, and Herodians to shreds? Or drove out the money-changers by
> violence? Or whirled on His best friend and said "get thee behind me,
> Satan?"
>
> No, friend, but yours is the distorted, one-dimensional image of Christ
> prevalent in the churches today, which have no fight left in them, only
> empty platitudes and wishy-washy feel-good theologies.
Am I of no use, no value then?
Yes, I do have a one-dimensional image of Christ. It is to love.
The churches of today are not Him, Ike, nothing like Him, therefore they
cannot be used as a comparsion against what He has done and He is doing in
His Church.
Ike wrote:
> Sometimes, going "up" means getting down in the trenches and duking it
> out, which is what the second coming will be all about--we've seen the
> compassionate side of Christ, and had our chance to deal with that aspect
> of Him.
I'd like to know who has 'dealt' with that aspect of Him. Truly I would.
We have a different opinion on what 'getting down in the trenches' and
'duking it out' is. The religious fraternity today need to get down and
dirty and duke it out with God way before there is any great defending of
the gospel. It is a far far far harder fight to surrender to God, than to
defend a gospel that does not need defending.
Like a lamb to the slaughter...He did not need to defend truth, truth
triumphed without the help of human muscle.
Ike wrote:
>Now comes Jesus in the OTHER aspect, and it's going to be bloody as
>hell...literally.
> And Linda Lee is only a living precursor of the enemies of Christ to come.
Linda has been called by God, just as you have, and the Lord will deal with
her and you as He sees fit. Even now.
Jesus' is love, pure love, pure righteousness, pure truth, now if any man
can walk as He walked/walks, then that man can rebuke and tear down
strongholds all the day long. But I can tell you this, He did that. Now
comes the manifestation of the sons of God who will do no other thing but to
show His glorious nature, and have no more time to rebuke, rebuff, etc,. etc
and get entangled in what is and will pass away.
Up high with the eagles love is the answer, always has been, always will be.
He could have slaughtered them all when He rose from the dead, swung around
the sword, slashed and burned; He could have yesterday. But this is still
the day of hope.
We can disagree and continue to reason, can't we, without me being labelled
a weak willed poofy pansy boy of a Christian? After all you did suggest in
one of your replies that there was a possibility that you might not connect
with everything I am saying.
Michael Christ
> Why do you use the nic Michael Christ ?
Because the Lord gave it to me.
Why don't you ask Ike then?
Ask him for a yes or a no, is Christ a liar?
Linda Lee
> Bucky Breeder wrote:
> >> H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
>
> >>> I alluded to this when I wrote the question about
> >>> which group Paul would belong to,
>
> >news:13olurh...@news.supernews.com:
> >> The Beatles, of course.
>
> >> Where is the scriptural foundation for a second
> >> or third or more generation of apostles?
>
> >> Kind regards,
> >> Nancy
>
> > Acts 1:2-1:9 & Acts 2:1, et seq.
>
> The twelve apostles were carefully chosen by Jesus and he
> took great care watching over them. He prayed for Peter even
> during his own hour of trial; he appealed to Peter to feed his
> lambs and sheep; he was willing to demonstrate the fact of his
> resurrection to Thomas. Of all, he lost none except Judas, the
> son of perdition. The selection of Matthias cannot be recognized
> as in any sense of the word the Lord's selection. He was, without
> doubt, a good man, but he was chosen by the other eleven without
> the Lord's authority. They were instructed to tarry at Jerusalem
> and wait for the endowment of the holy spirit at Pentecost. During
> this waiting period, and before they received the holy spirit, they
> cast lots and chose Matthias to take the place of Judas.
>
> The Lord did not reprove them for their undesigned meddling with
> his arrangement but simply ignored their choice and in due time
> brought forth the apostle Paul stating "He is a chosen vessel
> unto me."
Baloney. More Paul lies.
>
> Other disciples (followers of Christ) were beloved of the twelve
> and of the Lord; these include Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and others
> named and unnamed, but the twelve chosen by the Lord were so specially
> set apart from the other disciples. There is no scriptural evidence
> that there are layered generations of the twelve apostles. This is
> an error that befell the papacy by claiming that their apostolic
> authority could be traced back to Peter as the first pope.
>
> Kind regards,
> Nancy
>
> --
> E = F-flat
> Musician's Theory of Relativity
> Nancy Rudins nrud...@ncsa.uiuc.edu
I must have misunderstood your last post. You're just another deluded
Paul-worshipper. You should have much in common with Ike who says when
Paul claimed he lied that's not what he meant, and then maintains that
Christ did lie.
Linda Lee
wrote:
> Linda wrote:
> > Why do you use the nic Michael Christ ?
>
> Because the Lord gave it to me.
The LORD told you to call yourself Christ?
>
> Why don't you ask Ike then?
>
> Ask him for a yes or a no, is Christ a liar?
>
> Mike
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> My Sons are born of Me
> They are My Spirit.
> In them is no darkness at all.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have asked him repeatedly to retract saying Christ lied. He has
repeatedly insisted Christ lied.
To say someone lied is to call him a liar. (That is why no one likes
being accused of lying.) Quit pussyfooting around it.
Michael Christ
>This has been an incredible week.
Praise God, He's moving. :-).
Nancy Rudins
I recognize Paul as an apostle. There are no schisms in Christ. I
am not a Paul worshipper nor a Peter worshipper. I worship God.
I haven't much followed a lot of what Ike wrote about his claims
that Paul did not lie and that Christ did lie. I'm not interested
in cults of personalities; I'm only interested in what the Bible
teaches us. I respect and honor you as a sister in Christ as much
as I respect and honor all in Christ.
Kind regards,
Nancy
--
E = F-flat
Musician's Theory of Relativity
Nancy Rudins nru...@ncsa.uiuc.edu
Michael Christ
>Why do you use the nic Michael Christ ?
Michael Christ wrote:
>> Because the Lord gave it to me.
Linda wrote:
> The LORD told you to call yourself Christ?
You asked me why I use the nic Michael Christ, I told you.
Leave the judgement of it to Him.
Now...back to the matter at hand.
Linda wrote:
> I have asked him repeatedly to retract saying Christ lied. He has
> repeatedly insisted Christ lied.
> To say someone lied is to call him a liar. (That is why no one likes
> being accused of lying.) Quit pussyfooting around it.
You quit pussyfooting around Linda, ask Ike, is Christ a liar?
That is all you have to say.
Its either a yes or a no.
Linda Lee
wrote:
> Ike wrote:
> > So Jesus wasn't "flying high enough" when He ripped the Pharisees,
> > Sadducees, and Herodians to shreds? Or drove out the money-changers by
> > violence? Or whirled on His best friend and said "get thee behind me,
> > Satan?"
>
> > No, friend, but yours is the distorted, one-dimensional image of Christ
> > prevalent in the churches today, which have no fight left in them, only
> > empty platitudes and wishy-washy feel-good theologies.
>
> Am I of no use, no value then?
I would say you're of much more value than one who considers the
'greatest enemy' to be one who quotes Paul saying he lied and denies
Christ lied.
>
> Yes, I do have a one-dimensional image of Christ. It is to love.
>
> The churches of today are not Him, Ike, nothing like Him,
RIGHT. They are nothing like him because they are Pauline churches,
and they are like Paul.
> therefore they
> cannot be used as a comparsion against what He has done and He is doing in
> His Church.
> Ike wrote:
> > Sometimes, going "up" means getting down in the trenches and duking it
> > out, which is what the second coming will be all about--we've seen the
> > compassionate side of Christ, and had our chance to deal with that aspect
> > of Him.
>
> I'd like to know who has 'dealt' with that aspect of Him. Truly I would.
Ike doesn't care about Christ. He only cares about Paul.
>
> We have a different opinion on what 'getting down in the trenches' and
> 'duking it out' is. The religious fraternity today need to get down and
> dirty and duke it out with God way before there is any great defending of
> the gospel. It is a far far far harder fight to surrender to God, than to
> defend a gospel that does not need defending.
>
> Like a lamb to the slaughter...He did not need to defend truth, truth
> triumphed without the help of human muscle.
During his ministry, he did defend his truth against the lies. He was
silent when condemned to death and killed because his ministry "It is
finished".
>
> Ike wrote:
> >Now comes Jesus in the OTHER aspect, and it's going to be bloody as
> >hell...literally.
> > And Linda Lee is only a living precursor of the enemies of Christ to come.
Ike's totally lying here. He equates Paul with God. I oppose and
reject the lying Paul. I love Yeshua`.
I have never been Yeshua` the Messiah's enemy, and God knows that.
>
> Linda has been called by God, just as you have, and the Lord will deal with
> her and you as He sees fit. Even now.
>
> Jesus' is love, pure love, pure righteousness, pure truth, now if any man
> can walk as He walked/walks, then that man can rebuke and tear down
> strongholds all the day long. But I can tell you this, He did that. Now
> comes the manifestation of the sons of God who will do no other thing but to
> show His glorious nature, and have no more time to rebuke, rebuff, etc,. etc
> and get entangled in what is and will pass away.
>
Then why did the apostles dispute Paul, and Paul called them all
hypocrites (the meaning of the words "dissembled" and
"dissimulation") in Gal. 2:13?
Gal 2:13 Paul says, "And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him
[Peter]; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their
dissimulation."
Michael Christ
>> We have a different opinion on what 'getting down in the trenches' and
>> 'duking it out' is. The religious fraternity today need to get down and
>> dirty and duke it out with God way before there is any great defending of
>> the gospel. It is a far far far harder fight to surrender to God, than
>> to
>> defend a gospel that does not need defending.
>>
>> Like a lamb to the slaughter...He did not need to defend truth, truth
>> triumphed without the help of human muscle.
Linda wrote:
> During his ministry, he did defend his truth against the lies. He was
> silent when condemned to death and killed because his ministry "It is
> finished".
Yes, well I was referring to His ultimate act.
Isn't He good.
Michael Christ wrote:
>> Linda has been called by God, just as you have, and the Lord will deal
>> with
>> her and you as He sees fit. Even now.
>>
>> Jesus' is love, pure love, pure righteousness, pure truth, now if any man
>> can walk as He walked/walks, then that man can rebuke and tear down
>> strongholds all the day long. But I can tell you this, He did that. Now
>> comes the manifestation of the sons of God who will do no other thing but
>> to
>> show His glorious nature, and have no more time to rebuke, rebuff, etc,.
>> etc
>> and get entangled in what is and will pass away.
Linda wrote:
> Then why did the apostles dispute Paul, and Paul called them all
> hypocrites (the meaning of the words "dissembled" and
> "dissimulation") in Gal. 2:13?
> Gal 2:13 Paul says, "And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him
> [Peter]; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their
> dissimulation."
When Paul and Peter had that dispute, I find that nigh on impossible to
believe, insomuch as I am prepared to believe that a tare in translation of
scripture was sown. Allowed by God of course for reasons yet to be
revealed...to me anyways. For Peter to be guilty of what he was accused of
he would have to be like a beginner push bike rider not an apostle, and of
course he was an apostle.
In Revelation it does say that things can be added and things taken away
from the written word so it is possible, and knowing man you can almost
count on it.
You have to realise that God is God and He has allowed Paul to speak; there
is much truth in what he said, and for good reason because of the simple
fact that God has allowed him to say it. Throwing the baby out with the
bath water is foolish.
For instance...
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by
the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we
might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law:
for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
That is truth. I have some strong reservations about some of the things
that are translated Paul's words, particularly when the words say you should
be this and should do that because if a man be in Christ he does not need to
be told to be something he already is.
Much of what I read appears to be written to those that are called, desiring
and beseeching them to come up higher, and not to the chosen who are already
seated in Christlikeness in the heavenlies in Spirit with Him.
An example would be Romans 12:1. A son of God has done this; a person who
has yet to give their all/heart to God needs to be told this, which is a
person that is yet to commit their life to Him, yet to lose their life to
Him. So how can it apply to bride of Christ?
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
news:f059fae6-ac8a-44e7...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
LOL
Your debates haven't been rational from the very beginning, insisting that
2,000 years worth of Christians have been following "a false apostle," i.e.
Paul, as if no one would have noticed if Paul taught a different Gospel than
Jesus.
(Which is really ludicrous, as Paul was instrumental in TELLING everyone
what Jesus taught, via his letters, and his interactions with Mark, Luke,
and Peter, all of whom testified TO Paul, and whom Paul testified to.)
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Nah. All they're doing is opening new accounts, then inserting someone's
name and email address into the field of their newsgroup reader.
I went back to check and whoever it is has opened several accounts with
different free email providers, then they do this nonsense until enough
people complain that the free ISP shuts them down, then they move on to
another one.
They're not really hacking your account. They're just using your name and
email address.
For instance, we he or she did mine, the server was NOT a Verizon server
(which is my ISP)--it was from Optima Online.
Ike
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
[snip]
> Yes, Eikenboob, there is someone "more obviously an enemy" -- there is
> someone like you who claims my God lied. But since you're such a PAUL-
> WORSHIPPER it is OKAY for you to claim Christ lied, but it is not okay
> for me to quote Paul saying he lied.
NOT the way YOU are doing it, connecting what Paul was saying to a totally
unrelated event.
There is this little thing called "context." You should learn about it
sometime.
> Your statement is just proving once again who it is you really worship
> - Paul.
Nonsense--I take issue with Paul's statements all the time, but NOT from the
false assumption that he was a false apostle, but that, as he himself said,
he is a man, and all men "see through a darkened glass," including the man
who confessed it, Paul.
> You're so dumb and demonized that I'm just amazed at the extent of it.
Nonsense: No one in two thousand years ever came to such weird conclusions
as you do, save maybe for some other fringe nutcases.
And it all comes from your false readings of what Paul said, AND of what
Jesus said.
Ike