JESUS WAS NOT BORN IN WINTER
glenn
8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field,
keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the
Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you
good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour,
which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped
in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly
host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into
heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto
Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath
made known unto us.
16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe
lying in a manger.
Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
--
Glenn
.
WAR! Thou son of hell! Shakespeare
.
A bad peace is worse than war. Tacitus
.
By peace he shall destroy many. Daniel
.
Zadok
"glenn" <gamc...@spiritone.com> wrote in message ...
> Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
Jesus wasn't born, he was hatched!!
Smile.
Aaron
wrote:
>Luke 2:
> 8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field,
>keeping watch over their flock by night.
> 9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the
>Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
> 10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you
>good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
> 11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour,
>which is Christ the Lord.
> 12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped
>in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
> 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly
>host praising God, and saying,
> 14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
> 15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into
>heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto
>Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath
>made known unto us.
> 16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe
>lying in a manger.
>
>
>Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
Since Roman tax collection was done in the fall when farmers had money
in pocket, that does not make historical sense. Roman custom was to
exploit a preexisting festival for census and tax collection if
possible, and Israel has three pilgrimage festivals, one of which,
Sukkot, occurs in the Fall.
If you bother to cross reference Luke and Chronicles and do some
simple math, it is clear that he was born in the Fall, in Tishri, if
Miryam's pregancy when full term, and all accounts indicate that it
did. If you compare the Greek text of John 1:14 to that of Nehmiah
8:15 you see that Messiah "built His sukkah among us." This means
that we can pinpoint the date as 15 Tishri by using Scripture.
ruth
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 15:17:29 -0800, glenn <gamccl...@spiritone.com>
>
> - Show quoted text -
How true.
The Feast of Tabernacles. The Feast of mandatory rejoicing.
And on the eighth day, He was circumcised.
The additional day? Shemini Atzeret?
YHVH says in Zech. 14 that the gentiles must come to Jerusalem for
this Feast in the end times.
I think that during the seven days of the Feast they were to read the
whole Torah aloud.
That is probably why God commands that the gentiles come up to
jerusalem then or perish.
Ruth
Ruth
glenn
Thank you, Aaron, for your correction.
I will reconsider my position, and rephrase it, with your approval, to
"Jesus was not born in winter."
Thank you for referring me to Nehemiah.
The lord bless you.
Nyarlat Hotep
spectacular orgasm and I bet she had magnificent cuntfarts as the
babydaddy of Jesus plowed her furrow.
Aaron
wrote:
My "approval"? Anyone who actually cares more about what the Word of
God says rather than what they wish it said gets my respect. And that
is a bit more than just approval.
>
>
>Thank you for referring me to Nehemiah.
>The lord bless you.
And you.
duke
>Luke 2:
> 8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field,
>keeping watch over their flock by night.
> 9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the
>Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
> 10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you
>good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
> 11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour,
>which is Christ the Lord.
> 12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped
>in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
> 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly
>host praising God, and saying,
> 14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
> 15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into
>heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto
>Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath
>made known unto us.
> 16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe
>lying in a manger.
>
>
>Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
Yep, and in a cave with the other lambs. But we celebrate his birthday on
December 25.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Wild Bill
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1ukkj5pr0nis4lg2r...@4ax.com...
He was most likely born in the town of Nazareth...nowhere near Bethlehem.
duke
How come?
Wild Bill
Well, for starters duke, the so-called prophecy of Micah 5:2 refers to a
clan, not a place. And, the N.T. account of the journey to Bethlehem by
Joseph and Mary is a myth and legend. The Romans were efficient
administrators and did not require that Joseph register in his town of
birth, but rather in the town where he lived amd worked--most likely
Nazareth.
duke
>>>>>Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
>>>> Yep, and in a cave with the other lambs. But we celebrate his birthday
>>>> on December 25.
>>>He was most likely born in the town of Nazareth...nowhere near Bethlehem.
>> How come?
>Well, for starters duke, the so-called prophecy of Micah 5:2 refers to a
>clan, not a place. And, the N.T. account of the journey to Bethlehem by
>Joseph and Mary is a myth and legend.
Why is the trip a myth? Do you have any authority on that?
> The Romans were efficient
>administrators and did not require that Joseph register in his town of
>birth, but rather in the town where he lived amd worked--most likely
>Nazareth.
Then why did the Romans require people to travel back to their place of birth?
Wild Bill
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:20:46 -0800, "Wild Bill" <bils...@daytonwa.net>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>>Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
>
>>>>> Yep, and in a cave with the other lambs. But we celebrate his
>>>>> birthday
>>>>> on December 25.
>
>>>>He was most likely born in the town of Nazareth...nowhere near
>>>>Bethlehem.
>>> How come?
>
>>Well, for starters duke, the so-called prophecy of Micah 5:2 refers to a
>>clan, not a place. And, the N.T. account of the journey to Bethlehem by
>>Joseph and Mary is a myth and legend.
>
> Why is the trip a myth? Do you have any authority on that?
>
>> The Romans were efficient
>>administrators and did not require that Joseph register in his town of
>>birth, but rather in the town where he lived amd worked--most likely
>>Nazareth.
>
> Then why did the Romans require people to travel back to their place of
> birth?
They didn't duke, that's my main point! It's a story dreamed up by N.T.
writers to get Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem to fulfill what they believed
(erroneously) to be an O.T. prophecy. Along the same lines is the myth of
the slaughter of the innocents by Herod. Never happened except in the
fertile imaginations of N.T. writers. You really need to read Professor Bart
Erhman's book!
duke
>> Then why did the Romans require people to travel back to their place of
>> birth?
>They didn't duke, that's my main point! It's a story dreamed up by N.T.
>writers to get Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem to fulfill what they believed
>(erroneously) to be an O.T. prophecy.
Gosh, did humpty dumpty fall off the wall the same day?
Terry Cross
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 15:17:29 -0800, glenn <gamccl...@spiritone.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Luke 2:
> > 8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field,
> >keeping watch over their flock by night.
> > 9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the
> >Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
> > 10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you
> >good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
> > 11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour,
> >which is Christ the Lord.
> > 12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped
> >in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
> > 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly
> >host praising God, and saying,
> > 14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
> > 15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into
> >heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto
> >Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath
> >made known unto us.
> > 16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe
> >lying in a manger.
>
> >Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
>
> Since Roman tax collection was done in the fall when farmers had money
> in pocket,
You're right -- Christmas is celebrated four days too late.
Now if you had any sense of history, you would know that the birth of
Jesus is not the reason that the Mass of Christ is celebrated in
December. Christmas is the celebration of the event, not of the
anniversary.
TCross
Terry Cross
> "duke" <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:aunpj59j3167i3hkl...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:20:46 -0800, "Wild Bill" <bilsg...@daytonwa.net>
> > wrote:
>
> >>>>>>Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
>
> >>>>> Yep, and in a cave with the other lambs. But we celebrate his
> >>>>> birthday
> >>>>> on December 25.
>
> >>>>He was most likely born in the town of Nazareth...nowhere near
> >>>>Bethlehem.
> >>> How come?
>
> >>Well, for starters duke, the so-called prophecy of Micah 5:2 refers to a
> >>clan, not a place. And, the N.T. account of the journey to Bethlehem by
> >>Joseph and Mary is a myth and legend.
>
> > Why is the trip a myth? Do you have any authority on that?
>
> >> The Romans were efficient
> >>administrators and did not require that Joseph register in his town of
> >>birth, but rather in the town where he lived amd worked--most likely
> >>Nazareth.
>
> > Then why did the Romans require people to travel back to their place of
> > birth?
>
> They didn't duke, that's my main point! It's a story dreamed up by N.T.
> writers to get Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem to fulfill what they believed
> (erroneously) to be an O.T. prophecy. Along the same lines is the myth of
> the slaughter of the innocents by Herod. Never happened except in the
> fertile imaginations of N.T. writers. You really need to read Professor Bart
> Erhman's book!
Another Jew debunking Christianity? So many Jews insist on bringing
truth to Luther's sermons about the Jews!
Why don't they mind their own business and take the hatchet to the
Mosaic Torah?
TCross
glenn
"Any sense of history" ? That's laughable, and you should immediately go
stand in front of a mirror.
Regardless if Xmas is the date of the celebration or the supposed
anniversary -- it's wrong either way.
The Early Church, prior to about AD300 or so, did not celebrate the
Birth of Christ, they celebrated the death of Christ, because it's by
his sacrifice as the Lamb of God that we receive forgiveness for our
sins and inherit eternal life.
Quote:
Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. Irenaeus
and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feasts; Origen, glancing
perhaps at the discreditable imperial Natalitia, asserts (in Lev. Hom.
viii in Migne, P.G., XII, 495) that in the Scriptures sinners alone, not
saints, celebrate their birthday; Arnobius (VII, 32 in P.L., V, 1264)
can still ridicule the "birthdays" of the gods.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm
It seems apparent that the celebration of Christ's birth day, on January
6th, began in Egypt some 200 years after His Death, and was gradually,
over the next 2 or 3 hundred years, changed by the RCC to December.
At any rate, by any definition, it is a pagan practice and a pagan
holiday and it has nothing to do with the birth of Jesus.
Christians should not celebrate pagan holy days.
--
Glenn
.
"Common sense is in spite of, not the result of, education."
Victor Hugo
.
glenn
>
>
>
>
<Whatever>
Interesting, isn't it, Nyallat Hotep, how someone as disgusting as you
are...
...reveal the vulgar and corrupting nature of your being in what you
write and say as well as what you do!
http://www.google.com/search?q=Nyarlathotep&ie=utf-8
Glenn
--
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<tcro...@hotmail.com> spake thusly:
>>> Then why did the Romans require people to travel back
>>> to their place of birth?
>>
>> They didn't duke, that's my main point!
>
> Another Jew debunking Christianity?
It is well proved that they did and anyone saying
that they didn't, reads only atheist web sites and
calls that "research". Please! (:
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"More imprisoned is he who ignores conscience
to avoid jail." - Unknown
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<gamc...@spiritone.com> spake thusly:
>Quote:
>Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. Irenaeus
>and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feasts; Origen, glancing
>perhaps at the discreditable imperial Natalitia, asserts (in Lev. Hom.
>viii in Migne, P.G., XII, 495) that in the Scriptures sinners alone, not
>saints, celebrate their birthday; Arnobius (VII, 32 in P.L., V, 1264)
>can still ridicule the "birthdays" of the gods.
>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm
>
>
>It seems apparent that the celebration of Christ's birth day, on January
>6th, began in Egypt some 200 years after His Death, and was gradually,
>over the next 2 or 3 hundred years, changed by the RCC to December.
It was changed, because the church was so desperate
for converts, that it accepted just about anybody. And
when the church couldn't shake the paganism out of
its members, it then began incorporating pagan days
into itself, changing them up just a bit, so that what
the pagans always did, they still got to do and they
just "Christianized" it (which is a lie, since that can't
be done). And now we have "Christmas". (:
>
>At any rate, by any definition, it is a pagan practice and a pagan
>holiday and it has nothing to do with the birth of Jesus.
>
>Christians should not celebrate pagan holy days.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
Draccus
The reason for this has more to do with politics than it does to do
with faith or religion. The Early Church at the earliest days did not
care when Jesus was born the thought process being that the death of
Jesus was when he died, of course even that date was used more for
political than religious purposes as the Church adopted Pagan
Festivals and even built churches on in the place of Sacred Groves and
Temples. The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
rival of the Church at the time the Cult of Mithras and the Cult of
Jesus was just not doing well. There were a number of factions all
with their own views and all claiming to trace back to one Apostle or
another or to Paul or Luke and they were killing one another in the
streets of the Empire and the reason the Emperor called the Bishops to
come together to settle this among many other pressing issues of the
Day.
Draccus
> "duke" <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:aunpj59j3167i3hkl...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:20:46 -0800, "Wild Bill" <bilsg...@daytonwa.net>
I always knew I liked you Bill and the good Professor has a number of
books the good people of these Groups should read.
Draccus
LMAO you moron Bart is a Graduate of Moody Bible College. You see what
you assume is a Jewish name and your brain falls out.
Draccus
>
> It seems apparent that the celebration of Christ's birth day, on January
> 6th, began in Egypt some 200 years after His Death, and was gradually,
> over the next 2 or 3 hundred years, changed by the RCC to December.
>
> At any rate, by any definition, it is a pagan practice and a pagan
> holiday and it has nothing to do with the birth of Jesus.
>
> Christians should not celebrate pagan holy days.
>
> --
> Glenn
>
> .
> "Common sense is in spite of, not the result of, education."
> Victor Hugo
> .
I agree Glenn may I suggest a few other Pagan Holidays you stop
celebrating, Easter, Thanksgiving, Candlemas, and Memorial Day. That
should be a start.
Draccus
wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 16:26:36 -0800 (PST), Terry Cross
Dave just because the Bible says it is true does not mean it is
History. I know this is a shock to you being as you think everything
in the Bible is true, but this like so many things are not correct.
glenn
I'd add New Year's Day, Groundhog Day, Valentines Day, St. Patricks Day,
April Fools Day, Earth Day, Halloween and Good Friday with Easter and Xmas.
Why would you suggest Thanksgiving and Memorial day?
::: Jesus is LORD :::
e9ff6ac9-40ee-491f...@k23g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
What about birthdays?
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<dracc...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
> On Jan 1, 8:37�pm, Pastor Dave wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 16:26:36 -0800 (PST),
>> Terry Cross spake thusly:
>>
>>>>> Then why did the Romans require people
>>>>> to travel back to their place of birth?
>>>>
>>>> They didn't duke, that's my main point!
>>>
>>> Another Jew debunking Christianity?
>>
>> It is well proved that they did and anyone saying
>> that they didn't, reads only atheist web sites and
>> calls that "research". �Please! (:
>
> Dave just because the Bible says it is true
> does not mean it is History. I know this is
> a shock to you being as you think everything
> in the Bible is true, but this like so many things
> are not correct.
I do think that everything in the Bible is true
and it is not I who will be in for a shock.
But that has nothing to do with what I said
and your ignorance would be forgivable,
if it weren't for the vast arrogance that you
attach to it.
It is history that they traveled back to their
home towns, for the census. You may not
wish to believe that and this may come as
a shock to you, but reading atheist web
pages does not constitute actual research.
And no, I won't prove anything to you,
since it is obvious that you are not open
to discussion and with people like you,
it doesn't matter what someone shows
you. You will dismiss it out of hand.
Unlike you, I research things from both sides
of an issue. But you do not seem to be bright
enough to think that someone who is a pastor
knows more about history, science and the
Bible, than you do.
It never ceases to amaze me how much atheists
think they know, when all they do is look at atheist
web pages, skeptical of anything Biblically related
and especially how much they think they know
about the Bible itself.
Of course, when they are proven wrong, which
is of course, always, they dismiss it out of hand
and toss some insults behind them as they run
away, arms flailing! <chuckle>
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"A man is too apt to forget that in this world
he cannot have everything. A choice is all
that is left him." - H. Mathews
Draccus
wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 19:03:10 -0800 (PST), Draccus
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 1, 8:37 pm, Pastor Dave wrote:
>
> >> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 16:26:36 -0800 (PST),
> >> Terry Cross spake thusly:
>
> >>>>> Then why did the Romans require people
> >>>>> to travel back to their place of birth?
>
> >>>> They didn't duke, that's my main point!
>
> >>> Another Jew debunking Christianity?
>
> >> It is well proved that they did and anyone saying
> >> that they didn't, reads only atheist web sites and
> >> calls that "research". Please! (:
>
> > Dave just because the Bible says it is true
> > does not mean it is History. I know this is
> > a shock to you being as you think everything
> > in the Bible is true, but this like so many things
> > are not correct.
>
> I do think that everything in the Bible is true
> and it is not I who will be in for a shock.
>
> But that has nothing to do with what I said
> and your ignorance would be forgivable,
> if it weren't for the vast arrogance that you
> attach to it.
I have forgotten more about your Bible and its history than you will
ever know. You take the Bible and wield it as a weapon to harm others
and you use one of the worst versions of it to do so one the very
least accurate.
> It is history that they traveled back to their
> home towns, for the census. You may not
> wish to believe that and this may come as
> a shock to you, but reading atheist web
> pages does not constitute actual research.
Two problems there with that one the Romans only took a census of
Romans not those who merely lived in the Empire, second there is a
actual record of how the Romans did their Census and this is not it.
People were counted where they lived not where they were born. History
does not agree with your ignorant view point based in the old "The
Bible says and I believe it" philosophy. Try and do some actual
research on the subject reach out beyond to he KJV it might mean you
will learn something new, I doubt you will though.
> And no, I won't prove anything to you,
> since it is obvious that you are not open
> to discussion and with people like you,
> it doesn't matter what someone shows
> you. You will dismiss it out of hand.
I am not asking that you prove anything to me Son the History and the
Facts are on my side. All you have is the lie that has been spoon fed
to you and your own ignorance and lies to keep you warm. You are not a
Scholar of anything not History, Not Religion and certainly not the
Bible. You worship the message and ignore the one who delivers the
message. You have made the Bible your Idol and prostrate yourself
before it.
> Unlike you, I research things from both sides
> of an issue. But you do not seem to be bright
> enough to think that someone who is a pastor
> knows more about history, science and the
> Bible, than you do.
Dave you have not researched anything at all I and others have caught
you in so many lies it is not funny anymore.
> It never ceases to amaze me how much atheists
> think they know, when all they do is look at atheist
> web pages, skeptical of anything Biblically related
> and especially how much they think they know
> about the Bible itself.
Dave I have told you many times before I am not an Atheist, I am not a
Christian but that does not make me an Atheist. I know more of your
supposed faith than you will ever know of me or mine.
> Of course, when they are proven wrong, which
> is of course, always, they dismiss it out of hand
> and toss some insults behind them as they run
> away, arms flailing! <chuckle>
>
> --
>
> Pastor Dave
Dave the day you prove anyone wrong will make all of us die laughing.
Draccus
Thanksgiving traces its roots to the Ancient Feasting Festivals of the
Harvest and Memorial Day is also Pagan Harvest Festival.
Draccus
wrote:
> Draccus draccus...@gmail.com wrote in
> e9ff6ac9-40ee-491f-89dd-16aca4b6b...@k23g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
I was leaving them with a few examples no need to overwhelm their ever
small brains.
Wild Bill
"Draccus" <dracc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:89c7e1b3-85a8-41e1...@26g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
Ah, so refreshing to see someone on these groups who does his homework! My
hat's off to you sir.
@tampabay.rr.com Pastor Dave
<dracc...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
>> I do think that everything in the Bible is true
>> and it is not I who will be in for a shock.
>>
>> But that has nothing to do with what I said
>> and your ignorance would be forgivable,
>> if it weren't for the vast arrogance that you
>> attach to it.
>
> I have forgotten more about your Bible and
> its history than you will ever know. You take
> the Bible and wield it as a weapon to harm
> others and you use one of the worst versions
> of it to do so one the very least accurate.
And there it is. The personal attacks and
the arrogant claims of expertise. <chuckle>
Goodbye now.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
The atheists and even many "spiritual" people wish
for "Utopia". Little do they realize that this word,
coined by Thomas Moore in a novel, was really
a kind of joke. The word comes from the Greek,
"ou-topos" and is a Greek pun and literally means,
"no place" and the thrust of the novel, is that
what it all boils down to, as it turns out, is that
"no place is a good place". This is why he used
this word! :)
And yet, of course, the atheists in their ignorance
still dream of it and so do the "spiritual" folks
and even Christians today, who have taken on the
new (invented in the early 1800's) self pleasing
and aggrandizing belief called "Dispensationalism".
And so, before the Christians laugh at the atheists,
remember that if you are one of those Christians,
then you also look for the same place. You see,
when you believe that one day Christ will leave Heaven
(think about that... LEAVE HEAVEN... you also look for
this place on Earth, that will simply never exist and so,
YOU ALSO look for this same "Utopia"! (:
Heaven is not a place that God and His Christ are going
to leave, to come and live on a planet. How do we know
that for sure? Easy! :)
God says in His word that He does not dwell in buildings
(Acts 7:48-50) and yet, you expect Him to live on a
physical plane, even though He is outside of it and is
a Spirit and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth,
as the Scriptures say (John 4:24).
God does not come to live within His creation, but rather,
is above it! And so, when you acknowledge that He is
above His creation (and Dispensationalists surely do indeed
acknowledge that) and then claim that He will come here
with His Son to live, which means they will indeed have to
be physical, human beings at that point, then you have
indeed belittled God and denied His word and have tried
to make Him as small as you are, since Him doing this
would make Him subject to this world's physical laws
if He is going to be physical and therefore, He would
also be subject to linear time, which would then have
God aging, which, when you boil it down, is the exact
claim that Dispensationalism ends up making!
Think about this! Think hard about this! Think really hard
and you will find that all you can do when shown this, is to
immediately try to make things up on the fly to try to get
around this and that should tell you something, amen?
Your only other option is to personally attack me and
pretend that means you have defended your belief.
Either way, it's really very sad!
And so, shame on anyone who believes that sort of thing!!!
Shame! Shame!! Shame!!!
Wild Bill
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroup-mail @ tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3bruj5hqg910f87bp...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 00:00:21 -0800 (PST), Draccus
> <dracc...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
>
>
>>> I do think that everything in the Bible is true
>>> and it is not I who will be in for a shock.
>>>
>>> But that has nothing to do with what I said
>>> and your ignorance would be forgivable,
>>> if it weren't for the vast arrogance that you
>>> attach to it.
>>
>> I have forgotten more about your Bible and
>> its history than you will ever know. You take
>> the Bible and wield it as a weapon to harm
>> others and you use one of the worst versions
>> of it to do so one the very least accurate.
>
> And there it is. The personal attacks and
> the arrogant claims of expertise. <chuckle>
Problem is...he's right, Davey!
duke
>The reason for this has more to do with politics than it does to do
>with faith or religion.
Really!! So lets see what you got.
> The Early Church at the earliest days did not
>care when Jesus was born the thought process being that the death of
>Jesus was when he died, of course even that date was used more for
>political than religious purposes as the Church adopted Pagan
>Festivals and even built churches on in the place of Sacred Groves and
>Temples.
Well, we celebrate the birthday of all our loved ones. So Jesus is a good
choice. Of course, what his birth meant was the light coming out of the
darkness of sin.
As far as the festivals, we quickly took over them for worthwhile purposes
rather than the garbage reasons used before.
> The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
>rival of the Church at the time the Cult of Mithras and the Cult of
>Jesus was just not doing well.
Nah, the world's greatest authority claims mithra likely took from Christianity
rather than vice versa. Besides, the OT prefigured the NT and the birth of the
Lord way before anybody heard of mithra.
> There were a number of factions all
>with their own views and all claiming to trace back to one Apostle or
>another or to Paul or Luke and they were killing one another in the
>streets of the Empire and the reason the Emperor called the Bishops to
>come together to settle this among many other pressing issues of the
>Day.
Or maybe it was to have a fresh fruit sale, which makes a lot more sense than
you suggested.
duke
>The reason for this has more to do with politics than it does to do
>with faith or religion. The Early Church at the earliest days did not
>care when Jesus was born the thought process being that the death of
>Jesus was when he died, of course even that date was used more for
>political than religious purposes as the Church adopted Pagan
>Festivals and even built churches on in the place of Sacred Groves and
>Temples. The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
>rival of the Church at the time the Cult of Mithras and the Cult of
>Jesus was just not doing well. There were a number of factions all
>with their own views and all claiming to trace back to one Apostle or
>another or to Paul or Luke and they were killing one another in the
>streets of the Empire and the reason the Emperor called the Bishops to
>come together to settle this among many other pressing issues of the
>Day.
>Ah, so refreshing to see someone on these groups who does his homework! My
>hat's off to you sir.
He was on the toilet.
Wild Bill
No, the church assimilated the pagan festivals to gain converts from "the
heathen" of the times. Worthwhile purposes meant anything to advance and
solidify church power.
>
>> The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
>>rival of the Church at the time the Cult of Mithras and the Cult of
>>Jesus was just not doing well.
>
> Nah, the world's greatest authority claims mithra likely took from
> Christianity
> rather than vice versa. Besides, the OT prefigured the NT and the birth
> of the
> Lord way before anybody heard of mithra.
>
>> There were a number of factions all
>>with their own views and all claiming to trace back to one Apostle or
>>another or to Paul or Luke and they were killing one another in the
>>streets of the Empire and the reason the Emperor called the Bishops to
>>come together to settle this among many other pressing issues of the
>>Day.
>
> Or maybe it was to have a fresh fruit sale, which makes a lot more sense
> than
> you suggested.
C'mon admit it, duke, if it hadn't been for Constantine, your religion would
have died in infancy. Get your facts straight, will ya?
Terry Cross
People don't own "days." Your real complaint is that the
International Rabbinate did not authorize those days as holidays, and
the RamBam says that when Gentiles invent holidays for themselves,
they should be beheaded.
Jesus did not make a law forbidding people from celebrating. "As
little children" surely means to celebrate as little children do --
whenever and however the mood strikes us. We are not the bearded old
Israelites, afraid of semen and pigs and menstrual fluid and the Holy
Ark and looking sideways at thunder storms. We are a free people,
freed by Jesus from the witch-burning Pharisees.
Shove that up your yarmulke.
TCross
Draccus
wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 00:00:21 -0800 (PST), Draccus
>
> >> I do think that everything in the Bible is true
> >> and it is not I who will be in for a shock.
>
> >> But that has nothing to do with what I said
> >> and your ignorance would be forgivable,
> >> if it weren't for the vast arrogance that you
> >> attach to it.
>
> > I have forgotten more about your Bible and
> > its history than you will ever know. You take
> > the Bible and wield it as a weapon to harm
> > others and you use one of the worst versions
> > of it to do so one the very least accurate.
>
> And there it is. The personal attacks and
> the arrogant claims of expertise. <chuckle>
>
> Goodbye now.
>
You learn what a personal attack is Dave , my statement based on my
many years of dealing with you and watching the mindless crap you spew
as to my personal expertise does not equate to a personal attack. I
leave personal attacks to you seeing as you are a master of them
utilizing them often mostly by calling anyone who does not buy your
line bullshit an atheist.
What is sad is how little you know of your own faith much less anyone
else's faith on this and every other newsgroup. You ignorance shows
more with each post. Now if you wish to continue to worship your Bible
that is up to you.
Draccus
We are willing to share our Holy Days with you and if you now chose to
Celebrate the Birth of your God that is also a wonderful thing but let
us not pretend your reason is more noble and proper than our own for
we knew these days as Sacred when your Faith had not even been a
Thought and Our Value on these Days comes from a Natural understanding
of the World around us and not a feeble attempt to conquer those of
other faiths and those you could not convert torture and kill. That
has always been the practice of you Christians. Pagans do not kill
over matters faith for all Cults are equal.
> As far as the festivals, we quickly took over them for worthwhile purposes
> rather than the garbage reasons used before.
>
> > The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
> >rival of the Church at the time the Cult of Mithras and the Cult of
> >Jesus was just not doing well.
>
> Nah, the world's greatest authority claims mithra likely took from Christianity
> rather than vice versa. Besides, the OT prefigured the NT and the birth of the
> Lord way before anybody heard of mithra.
Oh yeah after all the Cult of Mithra was after the Cult of Jesus, oh I
am sorry that would be the other ways around since Mithra was
worshiped for long before Jesus was a thought. The OT was also created
and laid down long after the stories based on stories told by word of
mouth nice try there.
> > There were a number of factions all
> >with their own views and all claiming to trace back to one Apostle or
> >another or to Paul or Luke and they were killing one another in the
> >streets of the Empire and the reason the Emperor called the Bishops to
> >come together to settle this among many other pressing issues of the
> >Day.
>
> Or maybe it was to have a fresh fruit sale, which makes a lot more sense than
> you suggested.
Duke the History is well laid out and known the alternate factions of
the Christian faith were slaughtering one another and innocence for
almost 400 years. A little research and a lot of thought would make
you look a little less foolish.
Draccus
Actually I was making a point and it of course went over your pointy
little head. Christian complain about the Pagan Holidays and
traditions interfering with their celebrations so I suggested that is
fine then stop practicing all the other Pagan Holidays and Practices
adopted by the Early Church not to mention many rituals.
YeshuatheWay
> exploit a preexisting festival for census and tax collection if
> possible, and Israel has three pilgrimage festivals, one of which,
> Sukkot, occurs in the Fall.
>
> If you bother to cross reference Luke and Chronicles and do some
> simple math, it is clear that he was born in the Fall, in Tishri, if
> Miryam's pregancy when full term, and all accounts indicate that it
> did. If you compare the Greek text of John 1:14 to that of Nehmiah
> 8:15 you see that Messiah "built His sukkah among us." This means
> that we can pinpoint the date as 15 Tishri by using Scripture.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I agree with Aaron. However, Jews did not celebrate dates of birth,
only dates on death.
duke
>> As far as the festivals, we quickly took over them for worthwhile purposes
>> rather than the garbage reasons used before.
>No, the church assimilated the pagan festivals to gain converts from "the
>heathen" of the times. Worthwhile purposes meant anything to advance and
>solidify church power.
Not a lot of people having a religious holiday for the sunshine.
>>> The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
>>>rival of the Church at the time the Cult of Mithras and the Cult of
>>>Jesus was just not doing well.
>> Nah, the world's greatest authority claims mithra likely took from
>> Christianity
>> rather than vice versa. Besides, the OT prefigured the NT and the birth
>> of the
>> Lord way before anybody heard of mithra.
Great no response.
>>> There were a number of factions all
>>>with their own views and all claiming to trace back to one Apostle or
>>>another or to Paul or Luke and they were killing one another in the
>>>streets of the Empire and the reason the Emperor called the Bishops to
>>>come together to settle this among many other pressing issues of the
>>>Day.
>>
>> Or maybe it was to have a fresh fruit sale, which makes a lot more sense
>> than you suggested.
>C'mon admit it, duke, if it hadn't been for Constantine, your religion would
>have died in infancy. Get your facts straight, will ya?
Sorry, I know for a fact that Constantine legalized the Christian Faith. He
didn't found it.
duke
>> Really!! �So lets see what you got.
>>
>> > The Early Church at the earliest days did not
>> >care when Jesus was born the thought process being that the death of
>> >Jesus was when he died, of course even that date was used more for
>> >political than religious purposes as the Church adopted Pagan
>> >Festivals and even built churches on in the place of Sacred Groves and
>> >Temples.
>> Well, we celebrate the birthday of all our loved ones. �So Jesus is a good
>> choice. �Of course, what his birth meant was the light coming out of the
>> darkness of sin. �
>We are willing to share our Holy Days
It wasn't a holy day until Christians took it over.
>Oh yeah after all the Cult of Mithra was after the Cult of Jesus,
> oh I
>am sorry that would be the other ways around since Mithra was
>worshiped for long before Jesus was a thought. The OT was also created
>and laid down long after the stories based on stories told by word of
>mouth nice try there.
Mithra was a soldier's religion re a ray of diffuse sunlight. But it had no
definition until it took from Christianity.
>> Or maybe it was to have a fresh fruit sale, which makes a lot more sense than
>> you suggested.
>Duke the History is well laid out and known the alternate factions of
>the Christian faith were slaughtering one another and innocence for
>almost 400 years. A little research and a lot of thought would make
>you look a little less foolish.
What innocence?
Terry Cross
Really? You will no doubt be able to cite some of those complaints
and the complainers, then. You are not talking some hermit in a cave
-- you mean major denominations. And I don't think you will find any.
TCross
::: Jesus is LORD :::
f6a15cfc-9083-4993...@35g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
I see, I see...
:-)
Roger Pearse
> > >Jesus was born in the Spring of the year.
>
> > December 25.
>
> The reason for this has more to do with politics than it does to do
> with faith or religion.
So the establishment tell us. Whether we trust the establishment is
of course a matter of personal taste.
> the death of
> Jesus was when he died, of course even that date was used more for
> political than religious purposes as the Church adopted Pagan
> Festivals and even built churches on in the place of Sacred Groves and
> Temples.
If the assertion here is that the date of Easter was determined by
paganism, I would like to see the ancient text that says so. We can't
trust the sort of hearsay that floods the net on this; we have to see
sources.
> The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
> rival of the Church at the time the Cult ofMithras
Um, there is no association in any ancient literature between 25 Dec
and Mithras. This is a hoary old myth.
> and the Cult of
> Jesus was just not doing well. There were a number of factions all
> with their own views and all claiming to trace back to one Apostle or
> another or to Paul or Luke and they were killing one another in the
> streets of the Empire
This is fiction.
> and the reason the Emperor called the Bishops to
> come together to settle this among many other pressing issues of the
> Day.
And this.
Be sceptical of this stuff. It's put together by people with little
integrity and a lot of hate of Christians in order to hoodwink the
unwary. In every case, ask to see the specifics.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
Roger Pearse
> We are willing to share our Holy Days with you
We do not return the favour. And you have no holy days.
> Pagans do not kill over matters faith for all Cults are equal.
Snigger. Ever heard of Aztecs?
Christianity must be true, because all those who hate it are such
crude liars.
> > > The choice of December 25th was more to do with the chief
> > >rival of the Church at the time the Cult of Mithras and the Cult of
> > >Jesus was just not doing well.
>
> > Nah, the world's greatest authority claimsmithralikely took from Christianity
> > rather than vice versa. Besides, the OT prefigured the NT and the birth of the
> > Lord way before anybody heard ofmithra.
>
> Oh yeah after all the Cult ofMithrawas after the Cult of Jesus, oh I
> am sorry that would be the other ways around sinceMithrawas
> worshiped for long before Jesus was a thought.
Good. And just what evidence is there for Mithras prior to 80 AD?
<hint>
I expect you don't even know the difference between Mitra and
Mithras...
>The OT was also created
> and laid down long after the stories based on stories told by word of
> mouth nice try there.
Better than living by stories being made up now by the establishment.
Good luck with that!
> Duke the History is well laid out and known
Not by you, evidently.
> the alternate factions of
> the Christian faith were slaughtering one another and innocence for
> almost 400 years.
Bullshit. We leave that to haters like you.
> A little research and a lot of thought would make
> you look a little less foolish.
<Irony-meter exploding>
Try to avoid quite this much hypocrisy.
In My Fathers House
[...]
> Christianity must be true, because all those who hate it are such
> crude liars.
I do hope you were joking.
Wild Bill
"In My Fathers House" <hso...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:90186c0a-0f9b-49ff...@l30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Roger doesn't joke...he's too full of himself to do that!
Roger Pearse
I wish I was.
Roger Pearse
> "In My Fathers House" <hsot...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:90186c0a-0f9b-49ff...@l30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 5, 3:26 pm, Roger Pearse <roger.pea...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
> > Christianity must be true, because all those who hate it are such
> > crude liars.
>
> I do hope you were joking.
>
> Roger doesn't joke...he's too full of himself to do that!
Crude lie noted. Always nice to get confirmation that quickly!