Why does the woman of Rev 12 flee twice?
Doug
is the reason she flees to the wilderness twice?
In Rev 12:6, the woman flees to the wilderness, where she has a place
prepared of God, and they feed her there for 1,260 days. Who "they" are
is not stated. Then we read of the great war in heaven. It is a spiritual
war, and it is fought between the various angels of the dragon, and
Michael and his angels. Michael is victorious, and the dragon and his
angels are cast out. After Satan is cast out, the woman is persecuted by
the dragon. And she is given two wings of a great eagle, by which she
flees to the wilderness again. Both times, she is fed.
The period for which she is in the wilderness is given as 1,260 days in
verse 6, and as "a time, times, and a half" in verse 14. These
expressions represent the same period of time, in alternate ways.
These prophecies about the woman's flight to the wilderness imply that
many in the establishment churches and denominations are deceived, and
that to discover the truth, one must carefully study the scriptures. This
is also shown in the words of Jesus:
Matthew 7:13-14
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the
way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto
life, and few there be that find it.
Most people follow the teaching of the denomination in which they were
raised, but Jesus showed that if we are to follow him, even the unity of
the family will be threatened:
Matthew 10:35-37
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother
in law.
And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he
that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
To discover the truth, one may have to abandon some cherished family
traditions. At least, we should be prepared for it. This is what the
symbol of "fleeing to the wilderness" implies.
In the Olivet discourse, Jesus warned that if some one comes, trying to
lure you into the desert, or to some secret place, to discover the truth,
and learn of God, don't go after them.
Matthew 24:26-28
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go
not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the
west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered
together.
There are false teachers who take "wilderness" literally. The "carcase"
Jesus refers to evidently represents his people, and the truth of the
gospel, which will become a topic of much controversy. The wilderness he
said we should flee to is not a literal one.
These words of Jesus is also show that becoming involved in some obscure
sect is not how to follow Christ. The light of the gospel will shine from
the east to the west; it will be seen all over the world.
The first flight to the wilderness by Israel was the exodus from Egypt.
They remained in the wilderness for 40 years under Moses.
John the Baptist came when the magnificent temple in Jerusalem was
nearing completion, and he preached, not in the temple, but in the
wilderness. To hear his message, the Jews went out to the wilderness.
This represents a second "flight" to the wilderness by Israel. Those
people were Jews who were already occupying their "promised land," yet
still needed to learn about God. The reason they went out to the
wilderness was so they could learn of God. John's ministry shewed that
the established religious leaders of the Jews did not know God.
The prophecy of Revelation 12 obviously invokes symbolic language, but
false teachers insist that one particular element of the prophecy should
be taken literally. Hoeksema gives an example of this below, exposing a
mistake made by preterists who attempt to interpret this prophecy.
Rev. Herman Hoeksema
http://spindleworks.com/library/hoeksma/behold31.htm
<quote>
There is no one who takes this woman for a real woman. Nor are there any
interpreters who understand the dragon as a real animal, or the stream
which he casts out of his mouth as a real stream, or the wings which the
woman receives as real wings. In so far there is no difficulty.
But in spite of this, it is necessary that we remind you of the fact that
here we have no literal presentation of facts, but rather an allegory,
which does not allow of literal interpretation. For although all agree
that this is not a real woman with real eagle's wings, and that the
dragon mentioned here is not a real dragon, and that the stream of water
he casts out after the woman is not a real stream of water, yet there are
interpreters who make the mistake of singling out that wilderness and of
maintaining that it, at all events, must be taken in a literal sense of
the word. The woman, so they say, is at this time evidently in Jerusalem,
the Old Testament holy city. And as she is attacked by the enemy, she
flees into a literal wilderness somewhere in the vicinity, where she is
hidden twelve hundred sixty days, even as at the time of the destruction
of Jerusalem the disciples fled to Pella. Now this is violating one of
the most fundamental rules of interpretation, and especially of the
interpretation of the Apocalypse. And we must guard against it. There is
no right to single out one element in an allegorical representation of
things and to take it in the literal sense.
</quote>
Just as the woman in the prophecy is symbolic, and the sun is symbolic,
and the dragon is symbolic, and the wilderness is symbolic, so is the
time for which she remains in the wilderness. The 1,260 days and the
"time, times and a half" are clearly symbolic also. To claim otherwise,
and to say these refer to a literal 1,260 days, is to single out one
element in an obviously allegorical representation. This mistake is
commonly made by dispensationalists.
The woman in Revelation 12 pictures the church. She is clothed with the
sun, which represents the gospel, as Christ is the true spiritual light
of all mankind. John said, "That was the true Light, which lighteth every
man that cometh into the world." [John 1:9] John showed that every human
is to be enlightened by the gospel. Those who believe in Christ are
pictured by the woman in heaven. In this prophecy, she flees to the
wilderness, [Rev. 12:6] for 1,260 days, and also for "a time, times, and
a half." [Rev. 12:14] These time periods are symbolic of the entire
church age, when the gospel goes to the world.
Because the woman flees to the wilderness, the church (which is
represented by the woman) can not be identified with a great
denomination, that is visible to the world, with its head in Rome, or
some other city on the earth. The image of a woman fleeing to the
wilderness suggests that the church at times has been hidden from the
world, and its light has become very dim. No great denomination has fled
to the wilderness literally.
Puritan scholar William Fulke discussed this, in his "Praelections vpon
the sacred and holy Reuelation of S. Iohn," written in latine by William
Fulke Doctor of Diuinitie, and translated into English by George Gyffard,
1573. [Spelling updated for readability]
<quote>
Ver. 6. And the woman fled into the wilderness where she hath a place
prepared of God, that they should feed her there a 1000, 200 & threescore
days.
After that he had declared how that the son of the woman was taken up
into a place of safety, now he teaches how provision is made also for
that woman her self. God could at his will bind and restrain the devil
that he should not hurt the Church at all. But this is the most wise
dispensation of his holy will, that when she hath been proved, and tried
by sundry afflictions in the world, he will at length, take her to
himself into heaven: yet in the mean time he doth not fail her even in
the most desperate matters, but sends aid from heaven in due season.
Therefore he opens a way for the woman to fly, that she might for a time
eschew the violence of the Dragon. Christ himself also permitted this
manner of avoiding danger to his Apostles, Matt. 10. But when and who
ought to fly when persecution approach it is not so easy to express in
words as there the holy Ghost shall inwardly instruct every one when time
shall be. But that we should not think, that the woman should perish in
the desert, where there is the scarcity of all things, S. John doth
express, that there was also in the desert a seat prepared for her of
God, where she might safely for a time appointed by God, breathe and
refresh herself from the persecution of the Dragon. And lest we might
suppose that she would in the meantime want any thing, he shews that she
shall be nourished and fed there for a thousand, two hundred and sixty
days, that is, by the space of two and forty months, which make three
years and a half, which that time, when as it is the half of a
prophetical week, is said to be granted to Satan and and Antichrist, that
they cannot any longer oppress or afflict the Church. Moreover this place
doth plainly shew, that the church shall not always be visible to the
world, which thing the papists do urge most of all, for it should be
always in the sight of all men, how may she be saved to fly into that
wilderness; Yea it is certain by this place, that the church of Rome is
not signified by this woman, which was never banished and driven into the
wilderness, from the eyes of men. And lastly we are here also taught how
we must answer to our adversaries which ask us where our church was
before these two or three hundred years. Clearly if we know that the true
worship of God, was to be found in no region of Europe or Asia, it is
enough that it was in the desert, that is in places not commonly known,
that it lay hid by the decree of God, even unto the time by him appointed
for that number of the elect, which is the church that shall never fail
but God doth preserve and keep to himself seven thousand men, which have
neither bowed the knee to Baal nor kissed his image with the mouth, and
that, when as Elias believed that he remained alone in the people of
Israel. How much more is it like that there remained many elect of God,
throughout the large regions of Asia, and Europe, and also some parts of
Africa, in which the name of Christ is spoken of, which although they
were unknown to Antichrist and his adherents, yet they offered and
yielded to God his due honour. The papists therefore to their own hurt do
boast of their visible Church, and rashly do condemn ours, because it was
some time invisible to the Romanists. For in this it is more like to the
true church, that it sometime lay hidden: and their synagogue always
visible, doth sufficiently bewray itself not to be this woman, which fled
into the desert.
</quote>
Fulke's exposition of the entire chapter can be found here:
http://tcc.net16.net/OP/FulkeR12.html
John said, the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. [Rev. 19:10]
The wings of an eagle represent the gift of prophecy. In her second
flight to the wilderness, equipped with the powerful wings of an eagle,
the woman goes into her place, and is nourished there. This flight to the
wilderness follows the victory of the saints over the serpent. An eagle
is a predator which feeds on serpents! When the scriptures became widely
available, and were translated into the languages of the people, there
was much opposition from the established churches and clergy, yet the
church was given spiritual nourishment from the scriptures. Many
denominations arose, because of varying interpretations. The word itself
was translated and distributed around the world. When she flees to the
wilderness the second time the woman possesses the wings of eagles, which
represent the divine point of view, so the word may be properly
interpreted and understood.
--
Doug
Ike E 11/05/09
"Doug" <t...@sentex.net> wrote in message
news:FeadnYnWO5QXwWDX...@sentex.net...
> In the prophecy of the woman clothed with the sun in Revelation 12, what
> is the reason she flees to the wilderness twice?
She doesn't (at least not within the span of the same iteration). You're
just an illiterate fool.
[snip]
Ike
duke
Besides, she is Mary, Mohter of God and Queen of Heaven. The iron rod is dead
giveaway.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Ike E 11/05/09
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:gt3rf5tg00p77vtoi...@4ax.com...
[snip]
> Besides, she is Mary, Mohter of God and Queen of Heaven.
BABYLONIAN BLASPHEMY.
Ike
duke
Luke 1 and Revelation 12 cause you much dismay, herman.
Rod
This was very interesting and quite helpful. Thank you Doug.
Rod
Ike E 11/05/09
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:04:40 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:gt3rf5tg00p77vtoi...@4ax.com...
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>> Besides, she is Mary, Mohter of God and Queen of Heaven.
>>
>>BABYLONIAN BLASPHEMY.
>
> Luke 1 and Revelation 12 cause you much dismay, herman.
Hardly.
"Blessed" means to receive a UNEARNED GIFT, not an unearned one, as Jesus
had to rebuke Mary for on a couple of occasions.
And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
But you go right ahead using those Babylonian terms that are specifically
condemned in the Bible--it suits you.
Ike
Ike E 11/05/09
"Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
news:hdl7s0$dp7$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Doug wrote:
>> [snip]
> This was very interesting and quite helpful. Thank you Doug.
Only if you're totally clueless about prophecy.
Ike
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:t5lrf51dboqs700sb...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:04:40 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:gt3rf5tg00p77vtoi...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>> Besides, she is Mary, Mohter of God and Queen of Heaven.
>>>
>>>BABYLONIAN BLASPHEMY.
>>
>> Luke 1 and Revelation 12 cause you much dismay, herman.
>
>Hardly.
>"Blessed" means to receive a UNEARNED GIFT, not an unearned one, as Jesus
>had to rebuke Mary for on a couple of occasions.
?? little confusion there: unearned vs unearned.
And each time he addressed her with the name God gave his creation, "woman", and
each time, he followed her bidding "even though his time had not yet come".
>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
Wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ, Christ being the Bridegroom. And
Luke 1 says her birth son is the Son of God.
>But you go right ahead using those Babylonian terms that are specifically
>condemned in the Bible--it suits you.
Well, those words are used directly with Christ and his mother, so I'm on solid
ground.
Rod
Civil discourse and showing appreciation for anothers input
is a rare pleasantry on usenet. You should try it sometime..
Doug
article <1vitf5piasue9li1o...@4ax.com>:
> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 00:39:23 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:t5lrf51dboqs700sb...@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:04:40 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:gt3rf5tg00p77vtoi...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>>> Besides, she is Mary, Mohter of God and Queen of Heaven.
>>>>
>>>>BABYLONIAN BLASPHEMY.
>>>
>>> Luke 1 and Revelation 12 cause you much dismay, herman.
>>
>>Hardly.
>
>>"Blessed" means to receive a UNEARNED GIFT, not an unearned one, as
>>Jesus had to rebuke Mary for on a couple of occasions.
>
> ?? little confusion there: unearned vs unearned.
>
> And each time he addressed her with the name God gave his creation,
> "woman", and each time, he followed her bidding "even though his time
> had not yet come".
>
>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>
> Wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ, Christ being the Bridegroom.
> And Luke 1 says her birth son is the Son of God.
Jesus identified those who do the will of God as his mother, and his
brethren.
Matthew 12:50
For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same
is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Paul identified the church with the "Jerusalem with is above," and with
"the mother of us all."
Galatians 4:26
But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
He alludes to Sarah, Abraham's wife, as a type of the church. This
involves allegory, and two distinct metaphors, or symbols, that of a
heavenly city, and of a mother. These are just two among several that are
applied to believers. Other scriptures apply different metaphors. Some of
them are listed below:
a city, [Heb. 12:22]
a kingdom, [Col. 1:13]
servants, [Luke 19:12-14]
a temple, [Eph. 2:20; 1 Pet. 2:5]
a mountain, [Isa. 2:2, Dan. 2:35]
good ground, [Mat. 13:3-4,19]
a field of wheat, [Mat. 13:38-40]
a vine, [John 15:5]
a vineyard, [1 Cor. 9:7]
fruit trees, [Luke 6:43]
an olive tree, [Rom. 11:17-22]
a flock of sheep, [John 10:27]
lost sheep, [Isa. 53:6; Luke 15:4]
a net full of fish, [Mat. 13:47-48]
doves, [Mat. 10:16]
children, [Mat. 19:14]
virgins, [Rev. 14:1]
a bride, [Rev. 21:9]
a wife, [Eph. 5:31-33]
a family, [1 John 3:1]
soldiers, [Eph. 6:11]
an army, [Rev. 19:19]
>
>>But you go right ahead using those Babylonian terms that are
>>specifically condemned in the Bible--it suits you.
>
> Well, those words are used directly with Christ and his mother, so I'm
> on solid ground.
>
>
> The Dukester, American-American
> *****
> "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer." Pope Paul VI
> *****
--
Doug
Ike E 11/05/09
[snip]
>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>
> Wrong.
NOT wrong.
Mary is NOT the "mother of God." Jesus made that abundantly clear. His
FOLLOWERS, i.e. THE CHURCH ETERNAL, are His "MOTHER AND BRETHREN." [Mt 12:49
et al]
"Jerusalem which is ABOVE is mother of us all," [Ga 4:26] and John reveals
that "New Jerusalem," which is ABOVE, and "comes down from heaven" IS that
"mother."
So much for your literalist bullshit.
When Simeon prophesied of Mary, he said...
Lk 2:34-35b "Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many
in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against (Yea, a sword shall
pierce through thy own soul also) that the thoughts of many hearts may be
revealed.
Just as Jesus is set for the rise and fall of many in "Israel," a concept
based on the "two-edged sword metaphor" (mercy and condemnation), SO, TOO,
are TWO LIES told about Mary, one at each extreme: The lie of one extreme
was that she was a harlot (as told by the Jews), and the lie of the OTHER
extreme was that SHE IS IN ANY, WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, part of "GOD" (as told
by the modern "Babylonians").
And thus blasphemy is set at odds against blasphemy: There is lie that Mary
was LESS than what she was (the Jews); and there is the lie that Mary was
MORE than what she was (you).
[snip]
Ike
Ike E 11/05/09
No thanks. It's how the churches got INTO these messes, i.e. fools are too
busy being "political" and not truthful.
Ike
Rod
> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
> news:hdmk8a$679$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Ike E 11/05/09 wrote:
>>> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hdl7s0$dp7$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>> This was very interesting and quite helpful. Thank you Doug.
>>> Only if you're totally clueless about prophecy.
>>>
>>> Ike
>> Civil discourse and showing appreciation for anothers input
>> is a rare pleasantry on usenet. You should try it sometime..
>
> No thanks.
Yeah, somehow I just didn't believe that polite and honest is
somehow..something you could be good at.
Ike E 11/05/09
Honest I have covered: Doug's Idealism is about as screwed up as
Dispensationalism, Preterism, and even historicism.
And Jesus, Paul, and John never did "polite" where it wasn't called for.
Ike
duke
>>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>> Wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ, Christ being the Bridegroom.
>> And Luke 1 says her birth son is the Son of God.
>Jesus identified those who do the will of God as his mother, and his
>brethren.
>Matthew 12:50
>For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same
>is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Exactly. But that is not a preclusion to Mary being his mother. He was saying
that all that follow his Father is his family.
Doug
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in article
<hdockd$5h6$1...@news.eternal-september.org>:
> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
> news:hdnb7g$6nr$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Ike E 11/05/09 wrote:
>>> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hdmk8a$679$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Ike E 11/05/09 wrote:
>>>>> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hdl7s0$dp7$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> This was very interesting and quite helpful. Thank you Doug.
>>>>> Only if you're totally clueless about prophecy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ike
>>>> Civil discourse and showing appreciation for anothers input is a
>>>> rare pleasantry on usenet. You should try it sometime..
>>>
>>> No thanks.
>>
>> Yeah, somehow I just didn't believe that polite and honest is
>> somehow..something you could be good at.
>
> Honest I have covered:
Oh, so bullying and abuse substitutes for honesty?
> Doug's Idealism is about as screwed up as
> Dispensationalism, Preterism, and even historicism.
Here is George Gifford's discussion of the woman's second escape to the
wilderness described in Rev 12:13-17. It was to blunt the effect of this
and similar interpretations of prophecy that the futurist and preterist
doctrines were developed. [Spelling has been modified for readability.]
<quote>
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted
the woman which had brought forth the man child.
14 But to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might
flee into the wilderness, into her place where she is nourished for a
time, and times, and half a time, from the presence of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as it were a flood, after
the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 But the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and
swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast forth out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went and made war with
the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ.
We had last time (in that which goes next before in this chapter) the
battle between our great prince Michael, and the dragon. The dragon (as
we saw) took the foyle, and was overcome, and cast down from heaven to
the earth. Also we heard the heavenly and most joyful song of victory.
And now S. John shews that the dragon for all this doth not give over,
but still persues the woman, and her seed: we must still look for trouble
at his hands. When the dragon saw (saith S. John) that he was cast into
the earth, he persecuted the woman, which had brought forth the manchild:
he being then overcome of the head, sets upon the body. Yea, knowing
further that the salvation of the body is most finally ratified, so that
the blessed estate of the woman cannot be shaken in the heavens, he now
endeavours to root her out of the earth. For his persecuting of the
woman, shews that his purpose is if he can utterly and wholly to destroy
with cruel death all and every one which should be found to profess the
name of Christ. He fought by stirring up the high priests, the Pharisees,
and other cruel tyrants, to root out the name and memory of Christianity.
And considering how few they were in comparison, which embraced the
doctrine of the Gospel at that time, while all the Apostles remained in
Jerusalem: and weighing on the other side the great multitude, the mighty
power and cruel rage of the adversaries, which were stirred up and
inflamed by the dragon, it is a very great miracle that the whole
company, being almost all in one city, were not of a sudden set upon and
cruelly murdered. The dragon purposes even to spread his net over them
all at once, and not to let any one escape. He hath for to effect this
his purpose servants & ministers even in great number, armed with power,
and burning with furious rage, and which indeed, beginning with Steven,
set upon the rest. Why are not all destroyed? why do they not with the
like fury run upon all, that they did upon Steven? The Lord doth even
miraculously preserve and protect his Apostles and other which abode in
Jerusalem and many escape by flight into other places, as ye may see if
ye read, Acts 8. This flight and this dispersion, is so speedy and so
without let and danger, that he saith here, that to the woman were given
two wings of a great Eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness. These
be the wings of God's providence and mighty protection, opening and
preparing the passage, and the place where his Church should now rest and
be harboured and fed in the wilderness, even among the Gentiles. The time
of her abode in the wilderness was before numbered by days, as a
thousand, two hundred and threescore days, and here he saith, a time,
times, and half a time. Touching this time we have spoken before how
mythically it is to be taken, and not as the Papists, which apply it unto
three years and an half, as years are taken in common use, and so would
prove that AntiChrist shall reign but so long. Our Saviour did in his own
person preach three years and an half, and therefore some do interpret
that that time is used here to signify the whole time that the Church
shall be fed in the wilderness of this world. And indeed we saw in the
former chapter that the two Prophets do prophecy even so long. So long
also he saith there, the holy city shall be trodden under foot of the
Gentiles. Then all the time that the Church shall be persecuted & vexed
in this world, so long yet she shall be fed. But how is it said that she
might fly into the wilderness from the presence of the serpent? It is not
the devil in all places of the world? where should any one get from his
presence? The Gentiles did worship devils (as S. Paul testifies saying,
The gods of Gentiles are devils, 1. Cor. 10) and the devils had their
kingdom over the nations of the world. Alas then, she flys from the
presence of the devil: but is it not still into the presence of the
devil? There be devils plenty before she come, and wheresoever she come,
or any of her children, they be even compassed about with armies of
devils: and if they had not been there before, is the dragon such a lump
that he cannot make haste and speed to overtake her? Can the Church here
in earth fly swifter then the devils? For answer to these things, we must
note, that the flight of the Church from the presence of the serpent, is
not meant that she did or could fly from the presence of the devils, for
they always compass the faithful, if we take his presence absolutely: but
after a sort she flees his presence, when the power of the tyrants and
persecutors which he raised up cannot reach unto the Church or overtake
her, to murder and kill her. Thus it is then, the devils touching
themselves could be with the Church wheresoever she became in the world,
and how swiftly soever she fled: but they could not carry the power of
the murdering persecutors, and that is here called the presence of the
serpent. Then mark: those which fled from Jerusalem, could not fly from
Satan's temptations, wheresoever they became: but he could not reach them
with the power of the high Priests and princes of the Jews, that presence
of his she fled from. Indeed he attempted to pursue her that way, if he
could have brought it about, and Saul had letters and authority from the
high priests unto Damascus, Acts 9, but he could do little. For now
Samaria received the Gospel, shortly after Antioch a great city of the
Gentiles had a most famous Church planted in it, and they were the first
that were called Christians, as we read, Acts 11:26. Then Paul and
Barnabas were sent forth among the Gentiles, and the other Apostles also
went forth, and great Churches were planted in all kingdoms almost, in
the world. Now what hope could the dragon have to root out the woman from
the earth? which way can he now turn him? Is he yet in hope to root out
from the earth the whole Church? will he yet endeavour such a thing? That
he doth: he is so monstrous great, he hath so often prevailed, and hath
so many way, he is so bold that he yet attempts utterly to rid the earth
of her. And mark what S. John saith: And the serpent cast out of his
mouth water, as it were a flood, after the woman, that he might cause her
to be carried away of the flood. This is a strange thing, and wonderful
to be considered, that the dragon, when the woman was fled from his
presence, into the large and wide wilderness, cast out of his mouth such
abundance of water, as to make a swift and mighty flood that should drown
the woman, and utterly sweep her off from the face of the earth. It was
said before, that his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven,
and cast them to the earth, which shews the huge greatness of the
monster: and this casting forth a flood out of his mouth shews no less: a
flood to overflow and run through the great wilderness, and so to
overwhelm and drown her wheresoever she were. This greatness of the power
of Satan's kingdom causes him to be so bold, as still to maintain war
against the kingdom and power of almighty God. Do not think (beloved)
that the devils are weak in power or in practise against the Church: but
when ye read such things as this, consider what a most glorious power of
God it is which doth vanquish him, and pluck the poor woman out of his
jaws. For indeed, though the power of the devil in the kingdoms of this
world which be exceeding great, he is a mighty terrible prince, and can
command great things, yet compared to our great prince Michael, the Lord
Jesus, he is nothing. For our Lord, under whose banner we fight, is the
king of kings, and the Lord of hosts, whose power is infinite, and lasts
for ever and ever.
But what should this [flood] be which comes out of the devil's mouth? Do
ye not suppose, that the waters which come forth of his belly, be as
sweet and wholesome as the fountain itself out of which they flow? Sweet
things no doubt these waters are, even as sweet as the devil himself. But
what are they that he would drown the woman withall? Even a flood of all
foul heresies, of lies, of reproaches, and slanders, and such like. For
he raised up heretics, even monsters, which drew many counterfeit
Christians into perdition, and although (as Satan did know) he could not
destroy the faith and the salvation of the elect; yet by this means he
could bring them all into extreme danger of their lives, for the heretics
were such as the very Pagans might loathe to hear of. And then those
heresies coming out of his mouth as a part of those waters, yet he
persueded that the Gospel bred them. Men cried out that there were no
such things before that doctrine came, & that they did by and by spring
up with it. The gospel being thus charged and made odious as a most foul
doctrine, and such as bred monstrous opinions, all that did profess it
were extremely hated, even as men not worthy to be suffered to live upon
the earth. Thus were the minds of bloody tyrants stirred up, and
persecutions grew hot and bitter. Then were the poor christians even
compelled to meet in the nights in caves, and in secret places, & there
to have the holy excercises of religion. Upon this Satan took occasion to
accuse them of most horrible filthiness: as if they should eat their
children, and that men and women meeting together, out were the lights
put, & filthiness committed, even adulteries and incests, fathers with
their daughters, the brethren with their sisters, and such like.
Then further the heat of persecution being terrible, and sundry
revolting, the persecutors hired and procured some of them, to say
indeed, that when they were at those meetings of the Christians, there
were such filthy things committed, and that they themselves had there
committed such things. This gave strength and credit to the slanders, and
what think ye was the rage and fury of the heathen? who would not think
he did even a good work to destroy such? There is now nothing but killing
and murdering upon heaps. And yet the danger is further increased: for
the wrath of the Lord being kindled for such wickedness committed against
his son, against his pure word and Church, he poured forth horrible
plagues upon the world: then the subtle serpent did put and suggest into
the minds of the infidels, that all those plagues came, because the Gods
were angry at the new learning. The Christians were said to be the cause
of all those plagues: so that so soon as ever any strange thing fell out,
they cried by and by, to have the Christians cast to the lions, which was
one of the ways by which they put them to death. Ancient writers which
lived in those times, do testify of these things. Then we see how the
waters of heresies, of lies, slanders, and reproaches, do rise and swell
into a mighty swift stream: So that without the wonderful power of God,
providing for the woman even miraculously, how can she but be carried
away of the flood? how can she but be rooted out of the earth? Well, the
blessed Lord doth indeed provide for her: and delivers her from being
swallowed up of this great flood, of all these stinking waters which
issued out of the dragon's belly. For as the Lord hath ratified the
salvation of this woman in heaven, and set it so fast that the dragon
cannot shake it, so also he preserves her in the wilderness of this
world, until such time as she hath brought forth all her children. The
dragon doth cause thousands of her children indeed to be cruelly slain in
all places, but he cannot root her out, nor make her barren, but she
shall still continue in the world, bring forth and nurse up blessed
children to God, even to the day of the general judgment. Then the devil
doth tempt, the devil doth persecute, but he cannot pluck down the Church
from heaven from her salvation, nor yet destroy her with bodily death out
of this world. These things are fixed and established by God, and it is
impossible that they should be altered. But let us see how the woman
escaped drowning, for the flood pursues her into the wildernes. The earth
(saith Saint John) helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and
swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth. Here is a
wonderful deliverance, behold and consider.
Our Lord is the Lord of hosts, and hath all creatures both the living and
the dead at his commandement to help his Church. For as all things, when
he willeth, stand up and fight against the wicked, so also they fight for
the defence of the Church when he commands them. The earth is the Lord's,
and all that is therein: The earth acknowledges her Lord, and obeys his
commandment: the earth doth help the woman. Wonderful is God in his
providence: doth the earth help the woman? yea, which of his creatures
shall not help his chosen, even willingly when he will have it so? For
though it be said that the earth helped the woman, yet we must look up
higher, and know that it is the Lord which does it. For the earth doth it
but as the Lord's handmaid, and being thereunto by him appointed. Then
the holy Ghost doth not use this speech to draw our eyes from God, to
seek succour elsewhere: but indeed sets forth his wonderful power and
providence, which commands and directs all creatures to the service of
his Church. But now it may be demanded whether this be to be understood
of the very earth indeed, even the ground that we tread upon? Nay, ye
know that in this book things are to be taken mythically: and as he
compares the heresies, the lies, reproaches, and slanders to a flood of
waters cast forth of the dragon's mouth to carry away the woman: So he
compares the drinking & drying up of the same, as if the earth should
cleave and swallow up a flood of waters: for there is no way to restrain
a great flood, but if the earth open and drink it. This it is then, all
the heresies, all the slanders and lies cast forth as a mighty flood to
drown the Church, have by the good providence of God even as it were sunk
in the earth, and have been swallowed up. The Church remains in the world
at this day after all those ancient crimes and slanders call forth
against her, they being as it were sunk into the earth, and vanished. She
is long since justified and cleared from those sole faults which the
subtle serpent caused her to be charged withall, and brought into hatred.
Great multitudes, even of the wicked have been compelled to confess her
innocence, and to praise her. The heresies of all the ancient heretics
are even as it were drunk up by the earth. Some indeed Satan raises up in
all places as fit instruments to renew those former heresies, but cannot
prevail to rend & tear all in pieces, and to vex and make havoc as of
old. Indeed the errors of popery did overspread almost all in time past,
even like a flood; but now, even as if the earth had opened her mouth a
great part are sunk, and even the papists themselves confess that they
were abuses: and the rest of`their matters can hardly retain credit, no
not among a few. For not only the true believers, which in these last
times are many, but also multitudes of mere worldlings do see the vanity
of popery, and do despise it. And in this high providence of God, even
the earth that is the state of worldly things, and worldly men have
ministered some help. For when any mighty cruel tyrant, believing the
filthy lies and slanders raised against the faithful, purposes to root
them all out, and joins with other of the same mind: one thing or other
rises up even of and about the earthly state, and holds them occupied and
buried, so that they cannot perform their desire against the church.
Great kings and princes in these latter days have sworn each to other in
a cursed league, which yet they call the holy league, that they will join
all together, & even destroy from the earth all that profess the holy
Gospel, whom they indeed judge to be wicked heretics. Why have they not
prevailed? the earth hath opened her mouth, the worldly state hath been
such that they never could: but one way or other have had their hands
full. The floods of lies, of reproaches, and slanders cast forth by those
that worship the beast, against the faithful and holy servants of the
Lord, and with which the ears of princes have been filled, and their
minds enflamed to wrath and cruelty, and even by this means sunk: Indeed
there have been horrible slaughters committed, and many slain in France
and other countries, but the dragon is far from drowning the woman with
his stinking flood. If ye consider what a few the true professors of the
Gospel be, and what wonderful power there is in the world in the hands of
them that hate them deadly, and with them rooted out: ye shall be
constrained to confess that it is even a great miracle, as if the earth
did open her mouth and drink up the floods of the dragon's lies, that the
state of kingdoms and earthly things is such, that they cannot according
to their desire join together to destroy the woman. And even as the
Gospel was through subtilty of the serpent, charged in old times to breed
all those monstrous heresies which sprang up: so also at this day the
enemies cry out, that our doctrine doth bring forth all the heresies that
arise. The Anabaptists, the Libertines, those of the family of love, yea
all such execrable monsters, are by the servants of Antichrist, termed as
it were the children of those which preach the Gospel! But the falsehood
of this approach, and even the earth opens her mouth and drinks in the
flood of their false accusations. Furthermore it has pleased God in all
ages to use the men of this world sundry ways to help his Church: who are
even as the earth, in respect of any heavenly thing. Thus we see how the
woman doth escape the flood which the dragon casts out of his mouth. The
Church then cannot be rooted out from the face of the earth. Let this
comfort and stay us when the rage is greatest against the servants of
Christ. Ye shall at sometime see such tempests raised by Satan, as if
heaven and earth should be mingled together: Ye shall see such power bent
against the Gospel, and so great terror, as if all should fall down.
Nothing but slaughters, and terrible threatenings: yea so terrible as if
fire came out of their mouths even to devour all. Be not then dismayed,
nor do not faint: the Gospel cannot be beaten down, the cause of God
cannot be overthrown, neither can Satan ever bring to pass by all his
sleights and cruel practices, but that there shall ever some stand up
boldly to profess, to teach, and to maintain the same.
Now it followeth: Then the dragon was wrath with the woman, and went and
made war with the remnant of her seed, &c. What, was he not wrath with
her before? Yes, but this is to teach us, that the heat & fury of his
wrath still increased. But what is the reason that his wrath thus
increaseth? Because his enterprises fail, and that he can by no means
have his purpose to destroy the woman, therefore he is more & more
enflamed in wrath against her. In this is set before us a right devilish
wrath: for he hath no cause to be moved against the woman, but that he
cannot hurt nor destroy her. What hath she done to him? he fought to cast
her down from eternal blessedness, and took the foyle, and himself was
cast to the earth and all his. He laboured then to root her out from the
face of the earth, and all the ways which he devises fail of bringing his
desire to pass: and now he is more & more wrath, that he can no way
destroy her. Is not this a mad kind of wrath? as this is in the devil, so
shall ye see it evident in many men and women whom he doth work in. If
they be once inflamed with burning malice against any man, it carries
them with a desire to do them all the mischief which they can. It is even
meat and drink to them when they can hurt.
Now if they practice and deceive many ways and means, and see nothing
will prevail, they cannot hurt those whom they do bitterly hate; that is
a wonderful sting, it grieves them and torments them sore, and even
kindles in them a greater fire of wrath and displeasure, and the heat of
their fury burns hotter within them. For as it is some kind of quenching
or slaking the heat and fire of their malice, when they can execute their
desire upon those whom they so deadly hate, so the missing of their
purpose, kindles the flame. Let man take heed, for it is a most cursed
thing to be like, & to resemble the wicked devils. Such as abound in
malice are like the devil, and resemble him exceedingly: If Satan's wrath
be kindled, then he will not yet give over. Give over? No, he will never
give over until he be quite cast down. For he could not prevail against
Christ but was cast down, yet he set upon the church. When he saw one way
succeeded not, he fought another: when he could not destroy her out of
the heavens, he attempted to root her wholly out of the earth. When he
finds what he can do to afflict her, his wrath is still kindled more and
more, and he will do what he can to afflict her. Here is the thing, he
cannot do what he will: therefore he will do what he can. His fiery cruel
hatred and malice will not suffer him to rest. He will still be devising
what harms and mischiefs he can: and therefore it is said, he was wrath
with the woman, and went and made war with the remnant of her seed, &c.
He is then come down thus low that he can proceed no further, but to make
war with the true children of the Church, and that remains to all the
faithful, and shall remain even to the end of the world. There is no
pacifying of this enemy, there is no truce to be made or had with him for
so much as one minute of an hour: but it behoovs us to be always armed,
and always to stand ready to repell his assaults. Behold here also even
as it were the image of the devil in many men (for as the regenerate do
bear the image of God their father who hath begotten them in the new and
spiritual birth, so the wicked do bear the image of their father the
devil) which being overcome with malice that reigns in them, can never
cease nor give over, seeking and devising how to hurt those whom they
hate, although they take never so many foyles. If they cannot wreck their
anger to the full, they will also assay to do what they can. If they be
foyled and foyled again, yea even shamed, and can see no hope to do half
so much harm, nor the hundreth part: which they wish: yet they will not
give over, but if they can hurt but in a small trifle it shall come. Here
is the very image of the devil, where ye see this. Ye will say, it is a
great thing which Satan is here said to do, that he warreth against the
faithful. He doth wonderfully vex and torment the true Christians here in
the world. It is very true, this is a great thing considered in itself:
but compared with the other two, this one, that he fought to overthrow
the salvation of the church: the other, that he fought to destroy her at
once out of the earth; that she might never bring forth any more children
to God, it is but a small thing. And so I say, note it in men which burn
in malice and wrath, & they can never give over, their devilish mind can
never rest, though it be but in small trifles, yet will it shew itself.
The reason is evident, Satan the fiery red dragon cannot rest, and he
possesses their mind, therefore they cannot rest, for he thrusts them
forward, and will in no wise let them rest.
If they have lied, if they have slandered, if they have done injuries
other ways, and be convinced, rebuked, & for the time even suffer shame,
yet they must on again, he even thrusts them upon their noses. O woefull
and lamentable estate of slavery and bondage, which the servants of Satan
are held in, when the fierce dragon filleth them full of his fiery
malice, & will have them as restless as himself, even till he bring them
together with himself into endless misery. Resist him therefore, beloved,
give not place unto him by anger, and wicked enuie: For if he once get
hold in them, that is, to fill the heart with malice, he can hardly be
cast forth. But let us return now again unto that former point of Satan's
making war. He makes war with the remnant of her seed. Here is that which
we are to look for, even continual war with the dragon, and with all the
power which he can make: we have him our cruel & fierce enemy. All the
true children of the church must make full account of this so long as
they live, and stand prepared.
For although he find it (as I said) beyond his reach to root out the
mother, yet he will not cease to torment as many of her children as he
can, that he may terrify others from embracing the holy faith. We are put
in mind of this by Saint Paul, and willed to put on the whole armonr of
God, that we may be able to resist, Eph. 6. Here is also to be noted,
that Saint John makes a short description of the right seed, or true
children of the woman: for he saith, which keep the commandments of God,
and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. It is but short, but it is a
pithy description of the right seed, he notes two things which both go
together in the sound Christians.
They hold the doctrine and faith of Jesus Christ in an open and bold
profession, that is one: and walk in obedience to the law of God, that is
the other. They profess the Gospel, and will not deny it though it should
cost them their lives. And they profess it not with a dead faith, but
that lively faith which works by love: for he saith, they have the
testimony Jesus, and they keep the commandments of God. And this is one
chief cause why the dragon doth rage in wrath so sore against them, that
they will not with the rest of the world obey and worship him: but cleave
to the Lord God in faith and obey his laws. The children of this world
also, the ministers of Satan cannot abide them, because their works be
good; and they love the light, and they themselves love darkness more
than light, because their deeds be evil, John 3:19. Hereupon it
followeth, that the dragon shall always have them for to take his part,
and most ready to persecute the true children of God, because they cannot
but hate, even as he hateth. This much touching the dragon's making war
with the remnant of the woman's seed.
</quote>
From: Sermons vpon the whole booke of the Reuelation, by George Gifford.
Set forth by George Giffard, Preacher of the Word at Mauldin in Essex.
Richard Field and Felix Kinston, 1599. [Sermon XXVI]
--
Doug
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:1vitf5piasue9li1o...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 00:39:23 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>>
>> Wrong.
>
>NOT wrong.
>
>Mary is NOT the "mother of God." Jesus made that abundantly clear.
Jesus did make that abundantly clear: Mary is his birth mother, he is God (Son
of) and that makes her Mother of God.
Herman, if you want to play word games, go ahead. We Catholics are not trying
to make a big deal of it - it's you protest_ers that go ballistic over Mary. I
still complete my words with "Mary has no divinity, and all we do is ask her to
pray along side us to her son, Jesus, who showed in scripture that he took her
requests seriously."
WE Catholics love Mary as the Mother of the Work made flesh, hold her in high
esteem, saw that Jesus gave her his ear, and all she can do is pray for us. She
is definitely no co-mediatrix, and the old claim that one can even possibly make
re her co-redeemer status is that she is the taxi driver that brings Jesus to
us. She definitely drove the cab for 9 months.
>So much for your literalist bullshit.
Gotcha.
>When Simeon prophesied of Mary, he said...
>Lk 2:34-35b "Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many
>in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against (Yea, a sword shall
>pierce through thy own soul also) that the thoughts of many hearts may be
>revealed.
>Just as Jesus is set for the rise and fall of many in "Israel," a concept
>based on the "two-edged sword metaphor" (mercy and condemnation), SO, TOO,
>are TWO LIES told about Mary, one at each extreme: The lie of one extreme
>was that she was a harlot (as told by the Jews), and the lie of the OTHER
>extreme was that SHE IS IN ANY, WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, part of "GOD" (as told
>by the modern "Babylonians").
I'll go with Luke, and back it up with Rev 12:5. You protest_ers are so deathly
afraid of Mary that you'll go to full lengths to embarrass yourself.
duke
Herman is so hung up on his supposed research that he says no other person will
be saved because we worship the wrong Jesus.
Rod
> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
> news:hdnb7g$6nr$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Ike E 11/05/09 wrote:
>>> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hdmk8a$679$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Ike E 11/05/09 wrote:
>>>>> "Rod" <spa...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hdl7s0$dp7$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> This was very interesting and quite helpful. Thank you Doug.
>>>>> Only if you're totally clueless about prophecy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ike
>>>> Civil discourse and showing appreciation for anothers input
>>>> is a rare pleasantry on usenet. You should try it sometime..
>>> No thanks.
>> Yeah, somehow I just didn't believe that polite and honest is
>> somehow..something you could be good at.
>
> Honest I have covered: Doug's Idealism is about as screwed up as
> Dispensationalism, Preterism, and even historicism.
>
> And Jesus, Paul, and John never did "polite" where it wasn't called for.
>
But you weren't their, so you can only assume from what you've read
of others work. Written words can be manipulated.
No Ike, I think this is no more than just an excuse for you to beat
up other people to satisfy some twisted need that is hiding deep in
your psyche.
Rod
A very good, informative read. Thank you.
Doug
article <ug20g5ldn7c7836ko...@4ax.com>:
> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:49:13 -0600, Doug <t...@sentex.net> wrote:
>
>>>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>
>>> Wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ, Christ being the
>>> Bridegroom. And Luke 1 says her birth son is the Son of God.
>
>>Jesus identified those who do the will of God as his mother, and his
>>brethren.
>
>>Matthew 12:50
>>For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the
>>same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
>
> Exactly. But that is not a preclusion to Mary being his mother. He was
> saying that all that follow his Father is his family.
Rev. 12:17 speaks of the woman's "seed," those who keep the commandments
of God, and have the testimony of Jesus. It is not likely that this
refers to the brothers and sisters of Jesus after the flesh, that is,
Mary's children.
More likely, it refers to those who believe in Christ, and to those who
follow him, and depart from evil.
Prov. 16:17
The highway of the upright is to depart from evil: he that keepeth his
way preserveth his soul.
All who would follow Christ, depart from iniquity.
2 Timothy 2:19
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The
Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name
of Christ depart from iniquity.
Incidentally, many dispensationalists have a problem seeing that the
woman of Rev. 12 represents the church, and that her seed are Christians,
because they don't "keep the commandment of God." They even teach against
it; at least, prominent dispensationalists do.
In Rev. 12:4-5 there are parallels to Isa. 66:6-9, which was probably the
basis for this part of John's prophecy. Here, the woman is called Zion, a
name which is also applied to the church in the NT. [Heb. 12:22]
Isaiah 66:6-9
6 A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the
LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies.
7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was
delivered of a man child.
8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth
be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for
as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.
9 Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the
LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God.
Throughout Isaiah, many prophecies referring to "Zion" and "Jerusalem"
refer to the church, of which the prophets wrote, and of which they are
the foundation, together with the apostles, Eph. 2:20. It is the church
that "brings good tidings" in Isa. 40:9, not the earthly Jerusalem, which
is blinded. The "good tidings" is the gospel of our salvation.
Isaiah 40:9
O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain; O
Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength;
lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!
Similarly, in Isaiah 41:26-27, it is the church that "brings good
tidings," not Jews who deny Christ. And the one who vs. 27 refers to is
Jesus, who is called a "son" of the church, the heavenly Jerusalem, and
"mount Zion."
Isaiah 41:26-27
26 Who hath declared from the beginning, that we may know? and
beforetime, that we may say, He is righteous? yea, there is none that
sheweth, yea, there is none that declareth, yea, there is none that
heareth your words.
27 The first shall say to Zion, Behold, behold them: and I will give to
Jerusalem one that bringeth good tidings.
How could the literal mount Zion ascend into a high mountain? What
"beautiful garments" does the earthly Jerusalem have? But the church is
clothed with the gospel. These prophecies apply to the church. The high
mountain referred to is the promise of the kingdom of God, that is
destined to reign over the earth.
Isaiah 52:1
Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments,
O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into
thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.
The "uncircumcised" are those who lack the "circumcision of the heart"
that Paul wrote of. The church is the true "circumcision."
Philippians 3:3
For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice
in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah below, as related in Luke 4:16-21.
Isaiah 61:1-2
The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me
to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the
brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of
the prison to them that are bound;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of
our God; to comfort all that mourn;
Jesus was taken up to God, after he was raised from the dead. He is the
"firstborn" of the dead, [Col. 1:18] and the only one who has
immortality. [1 Tim. 6:16] This is what Rev. 12:5 refers to, "and her
child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." OTOH, Mary has not
ascended to heaven, and she waits for the resurrection, as do the other
saints who have died.
--
Doug
Ike E 11/05/09
> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:49:13 -0600, Doug <t...@sentex.net> wrote:
>
>>>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>
>>> Wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ, Christ being the Bridegroom.
>>> And Luke 1 says her birth son is the Son of God.
>
>>Jesus identified those who do the will of God as his mother, and his
>>brethren.
>
>>Matthew 12:50
>>For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same
>>is my brother, and sister, and mother.
>
> Exactly. But that is not a preclusion to Mary being his mother.
..which has nothing to do with Jesus being "God," hence, Mary is NOT "the
mother of God."
The CHURCH ETERNAL is the "Mother of us all," not Mary.
> He was saying
> that all that follow his Father is his family.
He was SAYING that Mary had nothing to do with his "Godhood," which makes
the "Mary the mother of God" statement A BLASPHEMY.
God contributed Jesus' divinity.
Mary contributed Jesus' humanity.
Period.
Ike
Ike E 11/05/09
> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:24:40 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:1vitf5piasue9li1o...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 00:39:23 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>
>>NOT wrong.
>>
>>Mary is NOT the "mother of God." Jesus made that abundantly clear.
>
> Jesus did make that abundantly clear: Mary is his birth mother, he is God
> (Son
> of) and that makes her Mother of God.
Babylonian bullshit.
[snip]
> I'll go with Luke, and back it up with Rev 12:5. You protest_ers are so
> deathly
> afraid of Mary that you'll go to full lengths to embarrass yourself.
You're going to embarrass yourself when you find out you're following the
false "Queen of Heaven" image right into hell.
[snip]
Ike
Doug
article <hdpb7c$nah$1...@news.eternal-september.org>:
George Gifford wrote three sermons expounding Revelation 12. They are all
interesting to read. You can find them here:
http://vinyl2.sentex.ca/~tcc/GR/Gifford24.html
--
Doug
Ike E 11/05/09
[snip]
> Oh, so bullying and abuse substitutes for honesty?
Better go look in the mirror when you say that.
[snip]
Ike
Ike E 11/05/09
[snip]
> Rev. 12:17 speaks of the woman's "seed," those who keep the commandments
> of God, and have the testimony of Jesus. It is not likely that this
> refers to the brothers and sisters of Jesus after the flesh, that is,
> Mary's children.
>
> More likely, it refers to those who believe in Christ, and to those who
> follow him, and depart from evil.
Thanks for demonstrating once again that you don't know anything about
prophecy.
The "woman's seed" that will "keep the commandments of God AND have the
testimony of Jesus" will be the dualistic Israelite-Christian Remnant that
will arise during the End of the Age as the Churches are dissimilated, and
God begins the process of reconciling the Old and New Testament's together
into a new, THIRD "Israel," ready made for the Millennium.
[snip]
Ike
Rod
Rod
Good luck getting anyone to listen to you.
Doug
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in article
<hdprch$5nc$3...@news.eternal-september.org>:
Ike seems to have taken a page from a dispensationalist book here.
Dispensationalists say the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount are for
Jews, in a future tribulation, and not for Christians in this present
age. However Paul emphasized that there is no difference between Jew and
Greek in Christ. [Rom. 3:22; 10:12]
Dispensationalist Lewis S. Chafer wrote about the beatitudes and the
Sermon on the Mount: "The Sermon on the Mount is characterized--among
other things--by the absence of those elements which are distinctly
Christian, i.e., redemption by the Blood of Christ, faith, regeneration,
deliverance from judgment, the Person and work of the Holy Spirit. The
absence of these vital elements cannot but arrest the attention of those
who are awake to, and jealous for, the faith once delivered to the
saints."
Chafer obviously didn't like the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the
Mount! When writing about some of the beatitudes in Mat. 24, he
contrasted them with what he imagined Christianity "under grace" meant.
<quote>
"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy" (vs. 7). In the
kingdom mercy from God will be made to depend wholly on the exercise of
mercy toward others. This is pure law. Under grace, the Christian is
besought to be merciful, as one who has already obtained mercy (Eph. 2:4,
5; Titus 3:5).
"Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God" (v. 8). Opposed
to this, and under grace it is written: "God, who commanded the light to
shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of
the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor.
4:6).
"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of
God" (v. 9). In the kingdom there will be special distinction given to
those who promote peace. "They shall be called the children of God."
Under grace, no one is constituted a child of God by any works whatever,
"for ye are all children of God by faith in Jesus Christ" (Gal. 3:26).
</quote>
Lewis S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, Dallas, 1948. 4: 223
http://withchrist.org/MJS/sermon.htm
Chafer thought that the Sermon on the Mount contains rules for Jews, not
for Christians in the present age. He said they were for "the future age
of the kingdom." He said:
<quote>
The Bible provides three complete and wholly independent rules for human
conduct--one for the past age (there was no need of recording such rules
as held good for people who lived before the Bible was written) which is
known as the Mosaic Law and is crystallized in the Decalogue; one for the
future age of the kingdom which is crystallized in the Sermon on the
Mount; one for the present age which appears in appears in the Gospel by
John, the Acts, and the Epistles of the New Testament.
</quote>
[Lewis S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, Dallas, 1948. 5: 98]
Of course, Chafer was wrong, as even many dispensationalists have
recognized.
Arno Clement Gaebelein was another prominent dispensationalist who seems
to have abhorred the Sermon on the Mount with passion. He wrote:
<quote>
In our days more than ever before we notice an astonishing misuse of the
sermon on the mount. The saddest of all is that many preachers of various
evangelical denominations fall back upon it as the most important
document of Christendom; for them it seems to become more and more the
Gospel, and the consequences are that we hear in our times more ethical
preaching, more about becoming better, doing good, improving your better
self, etc., than ever before. It would require much time and a great deal
of space to show up all the errors which are springing from this
application. It is the Gospel of works and evolution. And as this is done
there is less preaching of the utter corruption of man, his lost
condition and utter helplessness to be righteous (that which the
discourse makes very clear), and the salvation of God in our Lord Jesus
Christ, the absolute necessity of being born again, the reception of
eternal life, the new nature. As the teachings of the Epistle to the
Romans have been and are being abandoned in Christendom, the false
application of the discourse here in Matthew has been taken up. There is
therefore a continual increase of teaching about lifting man out of his
lost place into a better sphere by means of ethical teachings taken from
the sermon on the mount. This is done under the garb of a social
Christianity, union of worshippers, the Fatherhood of God and the
brotherhood of man. . . Surely, if evangelical preachers continue to
progress in this awful direction by substituting ethical teachings for
salvation by the precious blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, and declare, as
not a few have done, that the sermon on the mount is a large enough Bible
for us, a general apostasy from the faith will soon be reached.
</quote>
[Arno C. Gaebelein, The Gospel of Matthew, pages 107-108]
Many of the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount are echoed in
the epistles of Paul, and the writings of other apostles, in some cases
almost word for word. Where Jesus said: "Bless them that curse
you," [Matt. 5:44] Paul says: "Bless them which persecute you."
Paul taught that love fulfils the law. He said, "Owe no man any thing,
but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the
law." [Rom. 13:8] And Paul even quotes from the 10 commandments:
Eph. 6:1-3
1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
2 Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with
promise;
3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.
Paul said, "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." [Gal. 5:14]
Below are some examples of near correspondence between the teachings of
Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount on the one hand, and those of Paul on
the other. Similar examples of correspondence can be shown between the
teachings of Jesus and those of Peter, and of James. There is no merit in
this doctrine of dispensationalism, that seeks to negate the plain
teachings of Jesus and his apostles.
Jesus: "Blessed are the poor in spirit." [Matt. 5:3]
Paul: "Let no one think of himself more highly than he ought."
Jesus: "Blessed are the meek." [Matt. 5:5]
Paul: "Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of
mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering."
Jesus: "Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness:
for they shall be filled." [Matt. 5:6]
Paul: "For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness
and truth."
Jesus: "Blessed are the merciful." [Matt. 5:7]
Paul: "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth
another hath fulfilled the law."
Jesus: "Blessed are the pure in heart." [Matt. 5:8]
Paul: "Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good."
Jesus: "Blessed are the peacemakers." [Matt. 5:9]
Paul: "As much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men."
Jesus: "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and
shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake." [Matt.
5:11]
Paul: "Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer
persecution."
Jesus: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: am
not come to destroy, but to fulfil." [Matt. 5:17]
Paul: "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who
walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
Jesus: "But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it
is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by
Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King." [Matt. 5:34-35]
Paul: "Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil
speaking, be put away from you, with all malice."
Jesus: "Resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right
cheek, turn to him the other also." [Matt. 5:39]
Paul: "Recompense to no man evil for evil."
Jesus: "Love your enemies" [Matt. 5:44]
Paul: "If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him to drink."
Jesus: "Bless them that curse you." [Matt. 5:44]
Paul: "Bless them which persecute you."
Jesus: "Do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which
despitefully use you, and persecute you." [Matt. 5:44]
Paul: "Recompense to no man evil for evil."
Jesus: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven
is perfect." [Matt. 5:48]
Paul: "Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God."
Jesus: "If ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will
also forgive you." [Matt. 6:14]
Paul: "Avenge not yourselves."
Jesus: "Judge not, that ye be not judged." [Matt. 7:1]
Paul: "But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at
nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of
Christ."
Jesus: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye
even so to them." [Matt. 7:12]
Paul: "Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."
Isaiah no doubt wrote of Jesus when he said, "he will magnify the law,
and make it honourable."
[Isa. 42:21]
Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the
prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." [Mat. 5:17]
Just as Jesus fulfilled many of the prophecies in the OT, following his
teachings fulfils the law. In the New Covenant, God promises to write his
laws on our hearts. [Heb. 8:10, 16]
--
Doug
Ike E 11/05/09
> On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:21:20 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in article
> <hdprch$5nc$3...@news.eternal-september.org>:
>
>> "Doug" <t...@sentex.net> wrote in message
>> news:U_Gdnb59vLkg253W...@sentex.net...
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Rev. 12:17 speaks of the woman's "seed," those who keep the
>>> commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus. It is not likely
>>> that this refers to the brothers and sisters of Jesus after the flesh,
>>> that is, Mary's children.
>>>
>>> More likely, it refers to those who believe in Christ, and to those who
>>> follow him, and depart from evil.
>>
>> Thanks for demonstrating once again that you don't know anything about
>> prophecy.
>>
>> The "woman's seed" that will "keep the commandments of God AND have the
>> testimony of Jesus" will be the dualistic Israelite-Christian Remnant
>> that will arise during the End of the Age as the Churches are
>> dissimilated, and God begins the process of reconciling the Old and New
>> Testament's together into a new, THIRD "Israel," ready made for the
>> Millennium.
>
> Ike seems to have taken a page from a dispensationalist book here.
Nonsense.
The Dispensationalists DENY the function of the Remnant--it proves all of
their nonsense wrong, as THEY are the ones to whom Jesus referred when He
spoke of "gathering" the "elect who He shall choose," which is why they
constantly fight AGAINST me, you moron.
[snip the rest of the idiocy, as one cannot support a premise that is flawed
from the beginning]
Ike
duke
>On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:05:58 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>article <ug20g5ldn7c7836ko...@4ax.com>:
>
>> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:49:13 -0600, Doug <t...@sentex.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>>
>>>> Wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ, Christ being the
>>>> Bridegroom. And Luke 1 says her birth son is the Son of God.
>>
>>>Jesus identified those who do the will of God as his mother, and his
>>>brethren.
>>
>>>Matthew 12:50
>>>For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the
>>>same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
>> Exactly. But that is not a preclusion to Mary being his mother. He was
>> saying that all that follow his Father is his family.
>Rev. 12:17 speaks of the woman's "seed," those who keep the commandments
>of God, and have the testimony of Jesus. It is not likely that this
>refers to the brothers and sisters of Jesus after the flesh, that is,
>Mary's children.
>More likely, it refers to those who believe in Christ, and to those who
>follow him, and depart from evil.
That's what I said. As well as Mary being his birth mother.
>Prov. 16:17
>The highway of the upright is to depart from evil: he that keepeth his
>way preserveth his soul.
>
>All who would follow Christ, depart from iniquity.
>
>2 Timothy 2:19
>Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The
>Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name
>of Christ depart from iniquity.
>Incidentally, many dispensationalists have a problem seeing that the
>woman of Rev. 12 represents the church, and that her seed are Christians,
>because they don't "keep the commandment of God." They even teach against
>it; at least, prominent dispensationalists do.
That's why there are 39,000+ Christian faiths. Everybody has a different take
on the words in the bible.
>Jesus was taken up to God, after he was raised from the dead. He is the
>"firstborn" of the dead, [Col. 1:18] and the only one who has
>immortality. [1 Tim. 6:16] This is what Rev. 12:5 refers to, "and her
>child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." OTOH, Mary has not
>ascended to heaven, and she waits for the resurrection, as do the other
>saints who have died.
You believe what you want, we Roman Catholics believe what we want. After all,
there are 39,000+ protest_ant faiths.
What you're denying is that scripture calls Mary "most favored of God". That
can only mean purity from sin. That being the case, she and all other saints
dying in exemplary service to God are believed to now be in heaven.
duke
Haahaahaahaaahaa. Wow, now that's one that really far out.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:ug20g5ldn7c7836ko...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:49:13 -0600, Doug <t...@sentex.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>And Mary is NOT the "mother of God." The church eternal is.
>>
>>>> Wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ, Christ being the Bridegroom.
>>>> And Luke 1 says her birth son is the Son of God.
>>
>>>Jesus identified those who do the will of God as his mother, and his
>>>brethren.
>>
>>>Matthew 12:50
>>>For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same
>>>is my brother, and sister, and mother.
>> Exactly. But that is not a preclusion to Mary being his mother.
>..which has nothing to do with Jesus being "God," hence, Mary is NOT "the
>mother of God."
But Scripture id's JEsus as Son of God, and Mary as his mother would be "Mother
of God".
>The CHURCH ETERNAL is the "Mother of us all," not Mary.
The Church eternal did not carry Jesus for 9 months.
>> He was saying
>> that all that follow his Father is his family.
>He was SAYING that Mary had nothing to do with his "Godhood," which makes
>the "Mary the mother of God" statement A BLASPHEMY.
Aw, hecky darn, herman. Suppose you're wrong.
>God contributed Jesus' divinity.
>Mary contributed Jesus' humanity.
>Period.
Absolutely.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>Mary is NOT the "mother of God." Jesus made that abundantly clear.
>> Jesus did make that abundantly clear: Mary is his birth mother, he is God
>> (Son of) and that makes her Mother of God.
>Babylonian bullshit.
So you're denying the tie-back?
>[snip]
>> I'll go with Luke, and back it up with Rev 12:5. You protest_ers are so
>> deathly afraid of Mary that you'll go to full lengths to embarrass yourself.
>You're going to embarrass yourself when you find out you're following the
>false "Queen of Heaven" image right into hell.
I follow the Lord Jesus, not Mary.
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
> That's what I said. As well as Mary being his birth mother.
Mary contributing nothing to Jesus' Divinity.
She contributed His humanity.
God gave Jesus His Divinity, as Jesus testified that His "mother" (and
brothers and sisters) were his followers, i.e. the Church eternal is His
"mother," just as Paul wrote that "Jerusalem which is above is mother of us
all" (which is an eternal metaphor, not a literal statement).
But the Babylonian offshoots just can't live without their "fertility
goddess" headlining the show.
It's so telling that you use the same name for your perverted image of Mary
which the Bible itself condemns--the "Queen of heaven."
Talk about taking God head on...
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
Why? Paul said THE SAME THING in Romans 9 and Romans 11. So did David,
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Micah, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, and
Zechariah as John.
In fact, the whole triune "Israel" is summed up in a prophecy of Isaiah...
Isa 44:5 One shall say, I am the LORD'S [the Remnant]; and another shall
call himself by the name of Jacob [Israelites]; and another shall subscribe
with his hand unto the LORD, and surname himself by the name of Israel
[Christians].
Unfortunately, you being one of the blaspheming covenantalist replacement
theologists who "boasts against the root," you wouldn't get that.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
> But Scripture id's JEsus as Son of God, and Mary as his mother would be
> "Mother
> of God".
It does no such thing.
It ids Mary as giving birth to Jesus' flesh.
It ids Jesus' MOTHER as the Church eternal...
Mt 12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his
brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
Mt 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand
without, desiring to speak with thee.
Mt 12:48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother?
and who are my brethren?
Mt 12:49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said,
Behold my mother and my brethren!
Jesus' humanity came through Mary.
Jesus' DIVINITY came FROM "Jerusalem which is above, which is mother of us
all," i.e. God.
But you Babylonian types just can't get by without a fertility goddess to
worship, as you've done ever since the fall.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:15:24 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Mary is NOT the "mother of God." Jesus made that abundantly clear.
>>> Jesus did make that abundantly clear: Mary is his birth mother, he is
>>> God
>>> (Son of) and that makes her Mother of God.
>>Babylonian bullshit.
>
> So you're denying the tie-back?
What? The "tie-back" that you've adopted the same fertility goddess that you
Babylonians have been worshipping ever since fall?
No, I don't deny it at all.
>>[snip]
>
>>> I'll go with Luke, and back it up with Rev 12:5. You protest_ers are so
>>> deathly afraid of Mary that you'll go to full lengths to embarrass
>>> yourself.
>
>>You're going to embarrass yourself when you find out you're following the
>>false "Queen of Heaven" image right into hell.
>
> I follow the Lord Jesus, not Mary.
That's what you think.
Ike
Rod
Yeah, I'm sure that name calling is being obedient to YHVH and
Christ.....in the spirit of truth, what sane person would want to
spend eternity with a GOD that acts just like you do ?
Ike E 11/16/09
Hey, moron: Either get on topic, or take a hike.
Ike
duke
Christianity is the correction, the follow on, the last of man's actions to
Judaism.
>In fact, the whole triune "Israel" is summed up in a prophecy of Isaiah...
>Isa 44:5 One shall say, I am the LORD'S [the Remnant]; and another shall
>call himself by the name of Jacob [Israelites]; and another shall subscribe
>with his hand unto the LORD, and surname himself by the name of Israel
>[Christians].
>Unfortunately, you being one of the blaspheming covenantalist replacement
>theologists who "boasts against the root," you wouldn't get that.
You do a lot of play-acting, don't you.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's what I said. As well as Mary being his birth mother.
>Mary contributing nothing to Jesus' Divinity.
>She contributed His humanity.
I know, I know. That's what I said.
>God gave Jesus His Divinity, as Jesus testified that His "mother" (and
>brothers and sisters) were his followers, i.e. the Church eternal is His
>"mother," just as Paul wrote that "Jerusalem which is above is mother of us
>all" (which is an eternal metaphor, not a literal statement).
I know, I know. That's what I said. And Mary was still his Mother, just like I
said.
>But the Babylonian offshoots just can't live without their "fertility
>goddess" headlining the show.
Mary made him son of man.
>It's so telling that you use the same name for your perverted image of Mary
>which the Bible itself condemns--the "Queen of heaven."
And the iron rod of Rev 12:5 confirms it.
>Talk about taking God head on...
Gotcha.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:nuk2g5d6iuao2kbj7...@4ax.com...
>
>[snip]
>
>> But Scripture id's JEsus as Son of God, and Mary as his mother would be
>> "Mother
>> of God".
>It does no such thing.
>It ids Mary as giving birth to Jesus' flesh.
Herman, read my lips. Mary gave birth to the Son of God. She gave him his
humanity. Mary has no divinity. But she is still Mother of the Son of God.
You take it from there.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:43l2g51lm3gii1q52...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:15:24 -0600, "Ike E 11/05/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>Mary is NOT the "mother of God." Jesus made that abundantly clear.
>>>> Jesus did make that abundantly clear: Mary is his birth mother, he is
>>>> God
>>>> (Son of) and that makes her Mother of God.
>>>Babylonian bullshit.
>>
>> So you're denying the tie-back?
>
>What? The "tie-back" that you've adopted the same fertility goddess that you
>Babylonians have been worshipping ever since fall?
The iron rod of Rev 12:5 does you in.
Ike E 11/16/09
Nope. The REMNANT will be the correction of both.
>>In fact, the whole triune "Israel" is summed up in a prophecy of Isaiah...
>
>>Isa 44:5 One shall say, I am the LORD'S [the Remnant]; and another shall
>>call himself by the name of Jacob [Israelites]; and another shall
>>subscribe
>>with his hand unto the LORD, and surname himself by the name of Israel
>>[Christians].
>
>>Unfortunately, you being one of the blaspheming covenantalist replacement
>>theologists who "boasts against the root," you wouldn't get that.
>
> You do a lot of play-acting, don't you.
The dodge in lieu of argument is noted.
Now go back and deal with the fact that Isaiah prophesied of a THREE PART
"Israel."
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
No, got YOU, because you're now caught in your bullshit story, which you
realized was wrong after I showed you who Jesus' DIVINE Mother really was,
"Jerusalem which is above."
So now you've CHANGED your story, as if I wouldn't notice.
This whole argument started when you said Mary was "the Mother of God" and
"The queen of heaven."
NOW you're inserting "Mary was mother of the Son of God," as if that gets
you out of the blasphemies you made earlier.
Nice try, asshole.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:59:21 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:nuk2g5d6iuao2kbj7...@4ax.com...
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>> But Scripture id's JEsus as Son of God, and Mary as his mother would be
>>> "Mother
>>> of God".
>
>>It does no such thing.
>>It ids Mary as giving birth to Jesus' flesh.
>
> Herman, read my lips. Mary gave birth to the Son of God. She gave him
> his
> humanity. Mary has no divinity. But she is still Mother of the Son of
> God.
>
> You take it from there.
Don't have to. You just confessed that you were blaspheming before, when you
said "Mother of God" and "Queen of heaven," when Mary is neither, and now
you know it, so you insert "Mother of the Son of God."
Oh, and try presenting this new notion of yours to your Papal puppet
masters--you'll be excommunicated just like my boy Luther.
Got YOU.
Ike
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
And where will this remnant be consummated? Your turn, herman.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
Divine Mother? His bride is the Church.
>So now you've CHANGED your story, as if I wouldn't notice.
Sorry, herman baby. You're making up so much bs you're starting to dream.
>This whole argument started when you said Mary was "the Mother of God" and
>"The queen of heaven."
>NOW you're inserting "Mary was mother of the Son of God," as if that gets
>you out of the blasphemies you made earlier.
This is EXACTLY what I said before.
>Nice try, asshole.
Sorry, herman, but you're dreaming. I have never in my life discussed who
Jesus's divine Mother is. I have no idea. The Queen of Heaven is Jesus's
mother as confirmed by the iron rod.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:9i95g592ak47ah21b...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:59:21 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:nuk2g5d6iuao2kbj7...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>> But Scripture id's JEsus as Son of God, and Mary as his mother would be
>>>> "Mother
>>>> of God".
>>
>>>It does no such thing.
>>>It ids Mary as giving birth to Jesus' flesh.
>>
>> Herman, read my lips. Mary gave birth to the Son of God. She gave him
>> his humanity. Mary has no divinity. But she is still Mother of the Son of
>> God.
>> You take it from there.
>Don't have to. You just confessed that you were blaspheming before, when you
>said "Mother of God" and "Queen of heaven," when Mary is neither, and now
>you know it, so you insert "Mother of the Son of God."
I stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>Oh, and try presenting this new notion of yours to your Papal puppet
>masters--you'll be excommunicated just like my boy Luther.
>Got YOU.
Haahaahaahaahaa. Herman, you're a joke, making up a bunch of crap to suit your
fancy, and your failure in scripture knowledge.
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
>>Nope. The REMNANT will be the correction of both.
>
> And where will this remnant be consummated? Your turn, herman.
Quit trying to waste my time with your pointless diversions.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
> I stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
That's a greater conflict of terms than "military intelligence."
[snip]
Ike
Doug
article <rlm8g51qof2081im4...@4ax.com>:
The woman in heaven, depicted in Rev. 12, is not Mary, but no doubt Mary
is included among the saints who this woman represents. And the son who
was caught up to heaven, and who rules all nations with a rod of iron, is
Jesus.
The great red dragon with seven heads and ten horns draws a third of the
stars of heaven to the earth. The stars represent individual believers,
[Dan. 12:3] and the stars collectively must represent the church. This is
not some particular denomination, as such labels and divisions are of
man. The third of the stars which are drawn by the tail of the dragon to
the earth pictures those Christians who abandon their faith, or who are
deceived by false teachers, and swerve from the right path.
The saints are one body, [Rom. 12:5] and one temple, and the prophets and
apostles are its foundation. [Eph. 2:20] Christ is the chief cornerstone.
The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church because her seed are
those who have the testimony of Jesus, and who keep God's commandments
[Rev. 12:17] and also because she flees to the wilderness. Paul said the
experience of the Israelites in the wilderness after the exodus from
Egypt was to provide an example and a pattern for the church of the New
Testament. [1 Cor 10:1-12] Christians who follow Christ have escaped from
the corruption that is in the world. [2 Pet. 1:2-4] The worldly society,
from which they are delivered, is represented by Egypt and by Sodom,
[Rev. 11:8] because those are both places from which God's people were
delivered. When she flees to the the wilderness, the woman is fed. In the
wilderness the Israelites ate manna, a type of the spiritual food that
Christ provides to believers.
The 1,260 days, and the "time, times and a half" for which she remains in
the wilderness also identify the woman, as the 1,260 days is a
representation of a symbolic three years and a half. It is not a literal
three years and a half, as in the Roman calendar, the number of days
would be about 1,278 or 1,279 days, and in the Jewish calendar, either
about 1,240 or 1,270 days, depending on whether an extra month was
included in the period. 1,260 days is a mystical three and a half years,
like the 1,290 days and the 1,335 days of Daniel 12. These are all
similar, because they fit the pattern of "a time, times and a half," also
mentioned in Daniel 12. The two numbers in Daniel 12:11-12 each represent
three and a half years, where months are 30 days, and the units of the
first year differ from the rest.
1,290 days = 13*30 + 2*12*30 + 12*30/2
1,335 days = 12*30 + 2*13*30 + 13*30/2
Compare the above with:
1,260 days = 12*30 + 2*12*30 +12*30/2
Thus the woman in John's prophecy is directly associated with the
prophecies of Daniel, and he mentions the "saints of the Most
High," [Dan. 7:25] the "holy people," [Dan. 8:24] the "holy city," [Dan.
9:24] "the people that do know their God," [Dan. 11:32] those "whose
names are written in the book," [Dan. 12:1] and the "wise," who will
understand his prophecies. [Dan. 12:10] Daniel refers to the church in
each case.
Daniel's "time, times and a half" is a half of a prophetic week, and
since the ministry of Jesus was the first half week in which he confirms
his covenant with his church, this "time, times and a half," and its
equivalent of 42 months, and 1,260 days, represent the remainder of this
week, during which Christ confirms the covenant with us, or in other
words, it spans the entire age of the church, which is also the time
during which the antichrist makes war with the saints, and for which they
are given into his hand. [Dan. 7:25]
--
Doug
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
>>This whole argument started when you said Mary was "the Mother of God" and
>>"The queen of heaven."
>
>>NOW you're inserting "Mary was mother of the Son of God," as if that gets
>>you out of the blasphemies you made earlier.
>
> This is EXACTLY what I said before.
Oh, really?
duke, November 13, 10:56 am...
********
Besides, she is Mary, Mohter of God and Queen of Heaven. The iron rod is
dead
giveaway.
The Dukester, American-American
********
Lying shit.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
[snippeth]
> The woman in heaven, depicted in Rev. 12, is not Mary...
Bullshit.
The section is based on Matthew's infancy narrative (at the first level of
interpretation anyway).
You would lie about water being wet if it proved your false doctrines wrong.
[snip]
Ike
Doug
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in article
<he2o8n$2lh$1...@news.eternal-september.org>:
Jesus said to his disciples, "Ye are the light of the world. A city that
is set on an hill cannot be hid." [Mat. 5:14] This is why the woman in
Rev. 12 is depicted as clothed with the sun. The sun represents the light
of the gospel. This is also shown by Mat. 13:43, where Jesus said, "Then
shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their
Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear."
The sun represents the gospel, but at times the church's light has become
very dim, as the prophet Joel foretold; the sun would be turned to
darkness. This was because in the early history of the church, pagan
doctrines about the immortality of the soul, and unending infernal
torment of unbelievers, and similar errors, were introduced, and merged
with the teachings of the apostles, by false teachers.
Jesus identified the church as his "mother" in the spiritual sense when
he said, "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in
heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." [Mat. 12:50]
False teachers cannot understand this, and they misinterpret the prophecy
about the woman in heaven, in Rev. 12. Daniel said, referring to his
prophecies, "none of the wicked shall understand." (Daniel 12:10).
John the Baptist said,
Mat. 3:10
And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every
tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the
fire.
Jesus said,
Mat. 15:13-14
But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not
planted, shall be rooted up.
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead
the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
--
Doug
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:23:17 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in article
> <he2o8n$2lh$1...@news.eternal-september.org>:
>
>> "Doug" <t...@sentex.net> wrote in message
>> news:apqdnbHyrazTTJnW...@sentex.net...
>>
>> [snippeth]
>>
>>> The woman in heaven, depicted in Rev. 12, is not Mary...
>>
>> Bullshit.
>>
>> The section is based on Matthew's infancy narrative (at the first level
>> of interpretation anyway).
>>
>> You would lie about water being wet if it proved your false doctrines
>> wrong.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> Ike
>
"...don't listen to Doug--he can't even get my birthday right."
Once more for the folks in the cheap seats--Rev 12 is based on MATTHEW'S
INFANCY NARRATIVE. (And anything beyond that, Doug can't comprehend.)
[snip]
Ike
duke
Very good, herman. It was very obvious you didn't have a clue. Remember,
Christianity is the next step and final correction to Judaism.
duke
>> Sorry, herman, but you're dreaming. I have never in my life discussed
>> who Jesus's divine Mother is. I have no idea. The Queen of Heaven is
>> Jesus's mother as confirmed by the iron rod.
>The woman in heaven, depicted in Rev. 12, is not Mary, but no doubt Mary
>is included among the saints who this woman represents. And the son who
>was caught up to heaven, and who rules all nations with a rod of iron, is
>Jesus.
Yep, and who's Son is it.
And by virtue of what authority do you declare that it is not Mary. The Roman
Catholic Church cherishes her as Mary, and declares Mary as Queen of Heaven.
I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the Church that
Jesus founded.
>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
And Mary.
>The 1,260 days, and the "time, times and a half" for which she remains in
>the wilderness also identify the woman, as the 1,260 days is a
>representation of a symbolic three years and a half. It is not a literal
>three years and a half, as in the Roman calendar, the number of days
>would be about 1,278 or 1,279 days, and in the Jewish calendar, either
>about 1,240 or 1,270 days, depending on whether an extra month was
>included in the period. 1,260 days is a mystical three and a half years,
>like the 1,290 days and the 1,335 days of Daniel 12. These are all
>similar, because they fit the pattern of "a time, times and a half," also
>mentioned in Daniel 12. The two numbers in Daniel 12:11-12 each represent
>three and a half years, where months are 30 days, and the units of the
>first year differ from the rest.
>
>1,290 days = 13*30 + 2*12*30 + 12*30/2
>1,335 days = 12*30 + 2*13*30 + 13*30/2
>Compare the above with:
>1,260 days = 12*30 + 2*12*30 +12*30/2
Many things in the NT are prefigured in the OT.
>Thus the woman in John's prophecy is directly associated with the
>prophecies of Daniel
And the iron rod with Psalms 2:9.
Psalm 2:7-9 (New International Version)
7 I will proclaim the decree of the LORD :
He said to me, "You are my Son [d] ;
today I have become your Father. [e]
8 Ask of me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You will rule them with an iron scepter [f] ;
you will dash them to pieces like pottery."
duke
Haahaahaahaahaa.
I love it. You protest_ers can't even agree with each other.
I'll go with Mary, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven myself as stated by the
Church that Jesus founded.
The Dukester, American-American
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:rlm8g51qof2081im4...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:52:28 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>>This whole argument started when you said Mary was "the Mother of God" and
>>>"The queen of heaven."
>>
>>>NOW you're inserting "Mary was mother of the Son of God," as if that gets
>>>you out of the blasphemies you made earlier.
>>
>> This is EXACTLY what I said before.
>
>Oh, really?
>duke, November 13, 10:56 am...
Yep, you're just making macque thinking you know better than others.
>Besides, she is Mary, Mohter of God and Queen of Heaven. The iron rod is
>dead giveaway.
>Lying shit.
Tsk, tsk, herman. I can tell you until I'm blue in the face that the Mother of
God has no dignity, and swoosh, it'll sail right over your head.
duke
But it is the teachings of Christ.
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:18:21 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:1im8g5tsih0m56fdo...@4ax.com...
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>>Nope. The REMNANT will be the correction of both.
>>>
>>> And where will this remnant be consummated? Your turn, herman.
>>
>>Quit trying to waste my time with your pointless diversions.
>
> Very good, herman. It was very obvious you didn't have a clue. Remember,
> Christianity is the next step and final correction to Judaism.
Nope.
God has a third step coming, and YOU AIN'T IT.
Eze 14:22 Yet, behold, therein shall be left a remnant that shall be brought
forth, both sons and daughters: behold, they shall come forth unto you, and
ye shall see their way and their doings: and ye shall be comforted
concerning the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, even concerning all
that I have brought upon it.
Rev 14:1-5
And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an
hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their
foreheads.
And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the
voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with
their harps: And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and
before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but
the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.
These are they which were NOT DEFILED WITH WOMEN [/] FOR THEY ARE
VIRGINS. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These
were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the
Lamb: And in their mouth was found no guile, for they are without fault
before the throne of God.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
> I'll go with Mary, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven myself as stated by
> the
> Church that Jesus founded.
You're such a fraud: First you blaspheme. Then you lie and say you didn't
say the blasphemy. Then you say the blasphemy again.
Mary is NOT the "Mother of God" NOR "the Queen of Heaven:" Those are
BABYLONIAN blasphemies.
"New Jerusalem which is above is mother of us all," NOT Mary, Babylonian.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
> Tsk, tsk, herman. I can tell you until I'm blue in the face that the
> Mother of
> God has no dignity, and swoosh, it'll sail right over your head.
The Church Eternal has no dignity?
Shame on you.
Re 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God
out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:20:08 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:tum8g59vo8dfov28d...@4ax.com...
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>> I stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>>
>>That's a greater conflict of terms than "military intelligence."
>
> But it is the teachings of Christ.
Nope.
Less than half and fading...
Ike
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:t0uag5dk1bjf5hiqt...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:18:21 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:1im8g5tsih0m56fdo...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>>>Nope. The REMNANT will be the correction of both.
>>>>
>>>> And where will this remnant be consummated? Your turn, herman.
>>>
>>>Quit trying to waste my time with your pointless diversions.
>>
>> Very good, herman. It was very obvious you didn't have a clue. Remember,
>> Christianity is the next step and final correction to Judaism.
>
>Nope.
>
>God has a third step coming, and YOU AIN'T IT.
But when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
>Eze 14:22 Yet, behold, therein shall be left a remnant that shall be brought
>forth, both sons and daughters: behold, they shall come forth unto you, and
>ye shall see their way and their doings: and ye shall be comforted
>concerning the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, even concerning all
>that I have brought upon it.
Ezekiel 14:12-14 (New International Version)
Judgment Inescapable
12 The word of the LORD came to me: 13 "Son of man, if a country sins against
me by being unfaithful and I stretch out my hand against it to cut off its food
supply and send famine upon it and kill its men and their animals, 14 even if
these three men�Noah, Daniel [a] and Job�were in it, they could save only
themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign LORD.
Ezekiel 14:22 (New International Version)
22 Yet there will be some survivors�sons and daughters who will be brought out
of it. They will come to you, and when you see their conduct and their actions,
you will be consoled regarding the disaster I have brought upon Jerusalem�every
disaster I have brought upon it.
Well, so far we see the righteous Jew will be saved.
After Jewish righteousness comes Jesus, the correction to Judaism..
>Rev 14:1-5
> And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an
>hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their
>foreheads.
> And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the
>voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with
>their harps: And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and
>before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but
>the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.
> These are they which were NOT DEFILED WITH WOMEN [/] FOR THEY ARE
>VIRGINS. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These
>were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the
>Lamb: And in their mouth was found no guile, for they are without fault
>before the throne of God.
And God only knows what you're dreaming you're seeing here other than
Christianity salvation.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:l3vag5tvoot9he1tr...@4ax.com...
>
>[snip]
>
>> I'll go with Mary, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven myself as stated by
>> the
>> Church that Jesus founded.
>You're such a fraud: First you blaspheme. Then you lie and say you didn't
>say the blasphemy. Then you say the blasphemy again.
Herman, herman, herman. Mary is called in scripture as the Mother of the Son of
God, or Son of man. And as Queen of Heaven who's son will rule the world with
an iron rod. Psalms 2:9. You do know, don't you, that in those days the King's
Queen is his mother.
>Mary is NOT the "Mother of God" NOR "the Queen of Heaven:" Those are
>BABYLONIAN blasphemies.
They're right out of your bible, herman. Your major mistake is that you think
you have command of the only option. I accept multiple possibilities, and you
can't object other than to say 'you, herman, don't believe it'.
>"New Jerusalem which is above is mother of us all," NOT Mary, Babylonian.
Holy Mother Church as proclaimed by the RCC is another option.
You really need to further evaluate your mistakes.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:67vag59q5bfqm4bcf...@4ax.com...
>
>[snip]
>
>> Tsk, tsk, herman. I can tell you until I'm blue in the face that the
>> Mother of God has no dignity, and swoosh, it'll sail right over your head.
>The Church Eternal has no dignity?
Spell checker. The Mother of God has no divinity.
>Shame on you.
You knew better.
>Re 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God
>out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Right, like I had to advise you, Christ is the bridegroom, the bride being the
Church.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:2bvag517vl1mnkk95...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:20:08 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:tum8g59vo8dfov28d...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>> I stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>>>
>>>That's a greater conflict of terms than "military intelligence."
>>
>> But it is the teachings of Christ.
>
>Nope.
>
>Less than half and fading...
Like I said, I'll stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
Doug
article <3guag5hq3qcufok4f...@4ax.com>:
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:02:06 -0600, Doug <t...@sentex.net> wrote:
>
>>> Sorry, herman, but you're dreaming. I have never in my life
>>> discussed who Jesus's divine Mother is. I have no idea. The Queen
>>> of Heaven is Jesus's mother as confirmed by the iron rod.
>
>>The woman in heaven, depicted in Rev. 12, is not Mary, but no doubt Mary
>>is included among the saints who this woman represents. And the son who
>>was caught up to heaven, and who rules all nations with a rod of iron,
>>is Jesus.
>
> Yep, and who's Son is it.
>
> And by virtue of what authority do you declare that it is not Mary.
It is shown by the holy Spirit. For example, when Mary and Joseph brought
Jesus to the temple, there was an old man named Simeon there, who had
received revelations from God, that he would see Christ before he died.
He said these things about Jesus:
Luke 2:
Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,
Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:
For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,
Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;
A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.
And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of
him.
Jesus was called "a light to lighten the Gentiles."
And then Simeon said to Mary:
Luke 2:34-35
And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this
child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a
sign which shall be spoken against;
(Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts
of many hearts may be revealed.
In Revelation 12:1 the woman is clothed with the sun. It cannot be a
literal woman, who is clothed with the sun! The sun's mass is 2 × 10^30
kg, 4.4x10^30 lbs. It is about 333000 times the mass of the earth. So it
is not suitable for a woman's clothing, even Mary.
The woman and the sun are symbolic. The "light of the Gentiles" is
Christ, who worked through his apostles, such as Paul. He was called a
light to the Gentiles.
Acts 13:47
For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light
of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of
the earth.
Not only Paul, but all those who believe in Christ are called to be
"lights" in the world.
Philippians 2:14-16
Do all things without murmurings and disputings:
That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke,
in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as
lights in the world;
Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ,
that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.
The woman in heaven is clothed with the sun because Christ is her light.
Isaiah 60:19
The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall
the moon give light unto thee: but the LORD shall be unto thee an
everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.
> The
> Roman Catholic Church cherishes her as Mary, and declares Mary as Queen
> of Heaven.
The idea of the "Mother of the Gods" has its roots in paganism, in the
worship of Cybele, a Phrygian mother goddess whose worship was imported
to Rome in about 205 BC. Cybele was revered as "The Mother of All" or
"The Great Mother of the Gods".
Scholars have connected her worship with the introduction of worship of
the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La Mère des dieux: De Cybele à la
Vierge Marie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>
> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the Church
> that Jesus founded.
>
>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>
> And Mary.
The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary as being
Coredemptrix or Mediatrix or Mother of the Church or being a perpetual
virgin and the NT says nothing about her Assumption etc. Those opinions
must have come from some other spirit.
--
Doug
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:03:25 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:t0uag5dk1bjf5hiqt...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:18:21 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:1im8g5tsih0m56fdo...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>>>>Nope. The REMNANT will be the correction of both.
>>>>>
>>>>> And where will this remnant be consummated? Your turn, herman.
>>>>
>>>>Quit trying to waste my time with your pointless diversions.
>>>
>>> Very good, herman. It was very obvious you didn't have a clue.
>>> Remember,
>>> Christianity is the next step and final correction to Judaism.
>>
>>Nope.
>>
>>God has a third step coming, and YOU AIN'T IT.
>
> But when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
What does it matter to you? You STILL ain't it.
>>Eze 14:22 Yet, behold, therein shall be left a remnant that shall be
>>brought
>>forth, both sons and daughters: behold, they shall come forth unto you,
>>and
>>ye shall see their way and their doings: and ye shall be comforted
>>concerning the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, even concerning
>>all
>>that I have brought upon it.
>
> Ezekiel 14:12-14 (New International Version)
> Judgment Inescapable
> 12 The word of the LORD came to me: 13 "Son of man, if a country sins
> against
> me by being unfaithful and I stretch out my hand against it to cut off its
> food
> supply and send famine upon it and kill its men and their animals, 14 even
> if
> these three men-Noah, Daniel [a] and Job-were in it, they could save only
> themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign LORD.
>
> Ezekiel 14:22 (New International Version)
> 22 Yet there will be some survivors-sons and daughters who will be brought
> out
> of it. They will come to you, and when you see their conduct and their
> actions,
> you will be consoled regarding the disaster I have brought upon
> Jerusalem-every
> disaster I have brought upon it.
>
> Well, so far we see the righteous Jew will be saved.
Cite the word "Jews" in any of the above passages?
> After Jewish righteousness comes Jesus, the correction to Judaism..
Nope.
And you're "boasting against the root" fool.
>>Rev 14:1-5
>> And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an
>>hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their
>>foreheads.
>> And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as
>> the
>>voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with
>>their harps: And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and
>>before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song
>>but
>>the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the
>>earth.
>> These are they which were NOT DEFILED WITH WOMEN [/] FOR THEY ARE
>>VIRGINS. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth.
>>These
>>were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the
>>Lamb: And in their mouth was found no guile, for they are without fault
>>before the throne of God.
>
> And God only knows what you're dreaming you're seeing here other than
> Christianity salvation.
Notice how the fool has to discount the importance of the dualistic Remnant
yet to come--the correction of both Christianity AND Israel--to make his
false teachings work, much as the Dispensationalists, Preterists, and
Idealists have to do, too.
Such is the evil of covanantalism.
And a lot of arrogance helps, too, right fool?
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:22:04 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:67vag59q5bfqm4bcf...@4ax.com...
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>> Tsk, tsk, herman. I can tell you until I'm blue in the face that the
>>> Mother of God has no dignity, and swoosh, it'll sail right over your
>>> head.
>
>>The Church Eternal has no dignity?
>
> Spell checker. The Mother of God has no divinity.
...and he keeps on speaking the Babylonian blasphemies.
One more time for the fool: The CHURCH ETERNAL is the "mother" of God. Mary
was mother of Jesus.
[snip]
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:22:40 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:2bvag517vl1mnkk95...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:20:08 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:tum8g59vo8dfov28d...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>>> I stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>>>>
>>>>That's a greater conflict of terms than "military intelligence."
>>>
>>> But it is the teachings of Christ.
>>
>>Nope.
>>
>>Less than half and fading...
>
> Like I said, I'll stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
That's an oxymoron, moron.
Ike
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:hrsdg558dh78g7b2o...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:03:25 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:t0uag5dk1bjf5hiqt...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:18:21 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:1im8g5tsih0m56fdo...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Nope. The REMNANT will be the correction of both.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And where will this remnant be consummated? Your turn, herman.
>>>>>
>>>>>Quit trying to waste my time with your pointless diversions.
>>>>
>>>> Very good, herman. It was very obvious you didn't have a clue.
>>>> Remember,
>>>> Christianity is the next step and final correction to Judaism.
>>>
>>>Nope.
>>>
>>>God has a third step coming, and YOU AIN'T IT.
>>
>> But when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
>
>What does it matter to you? You STILL ain't it.
Neither are you. You have to do more than talk the talk, herman. So again I
ask: when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
>>>Eze 14:22 Yet, behold, therein shall be left a remnant that shall be
>>>brought forth, both sons and daughters: behold, they shall come forth unto you,
>>>and ye shall see their way and their doings: and ye shall be comforted
>>>concerning the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, even concerning
>>>all that I have brought upon it.
>>
>> Ezekiel 14:12-14 (New International Version)
>> Judgment Inescapable
>> 12 The word of the LORD came to me: 13 "Son of man, if a country sins
>> against me by being unfaithful and I stretch out my hand against it to cut off its
>> food supply and send famine upon it and kill its men and their animals, 14 even
>> if these three men-Noah, Daniel [a] and Job-were in it, they could save only
>> themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign LORD.
>> Ezekiel 14:22 (New International Version)
>> 22 Yet there will be some survivors-sons and daughters who will be brought
>> out of it. They will come to you, and when you see their conduct and their
>> actions, you will be consoled regarding the disaster I have brought upon
>> Jerusalem-every disaster I have brought upon it.
>> Well, so far we see the righteous Jew will be saved.
>Cite the word "Jews" in any of the above passages?
It's the Jewish OT. Or didn't you know that?
>> After Jewish righteousness comes Jesus, the correction to Judaism..
>Nope.
Heb 8:7-13. You know the Epistle - the one the Collegeville Bible Commentary
calls one of the most literary pieces of the NT, a sermon rather than a letter.
>And you're "boasting against the root" fool.
The root of Jessie is the new covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-33 says so.
In other words, you're reduced to babbling bs.
duke
And the Son of God in Luke 1, Mary being his mother.
>And then Simeon said to Mary:
>Luke 2:34-35
>And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this
>child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a
>sign which shall be spoken against;
>(Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts
>of many hearts may be revealed.
But so far you're not showing that the woman in Rev 12:5 is NOT Mary.
>In Revelation 12:1 the woman is clothed with the sun. It cannot be a
>literal woman, who is clothed with the sun! The sun's mass is 2 � 10^30
>kg, 4.4x10^30 lbs. It is about 333000 times the mass of the earth. So it
>is not suitable for a woman's clothing, even Mary.
Oh, give me a break.
>The woman and the sun are symbolic. The "light of the Gentiles" is
>Christ, who worked through his apostles, such as Paul. He was called a
>light to the Gentiles.
And the Son
>Acts 13:47
>For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light
>of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of
>the earth.
>Not only Paul, but all those who believe in Christ are called to be
>"lights" in the world.
Does he wear a crown of 12 stars?
>Philippians 2:14-16
>Do all things without murmurings and disputings:
>That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke,
>in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as
>lights in the world;
>Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ,
>that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.
>The woman in heaven is clothed with the sun because Christ is her light.
Of course she is. She is the mother of the Word become man.
>Isaiah 60:19
>The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall
>the moon give light unto thee: but the LORD shall be unto thee an
>everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.
>> The
>> Roman Catholic Church cherishes her as Mary, and declares Mary as Queen
>> of Heaven.
>The idea of the "Mother of the Gods" has its roots in paganism, in the
>worship of Cybele, a Phrygian mother goddess whose worship was imported
>to Rome in about 205 BC. Cybele was revered as "The Mother of All" or
>"The Great Mother of the Gods".
a. Eve, the first woman, rejected God and told him "no".
b. Mary, the new Eve, said let it be done according to God's will.
c. The first queen worshipped Baal
d. The second queen is the mother of the Word become man.
>Scholars have connected her worship with the introduction of worship of
>the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La M�re des dieux: De Cybele � la
>Vierge Marie. Paris: �ditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the Church
>> that Jesus founded.
>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>> And Mary.
>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
See above.
> as being
>Coredemptrix or Mediatrix or Mother of the Church
Mary has no divinity. She brought, and brings, Christ to us.
> or being a perpetual virgin
Bible totally silent here.
> and the NT says nothing about her Assumption etc.
Full of grace. See Luke 1.
> Those opinions must have come from some other spirit.
God.
>>>The 1,260 days, and the "time, times and a half" for which she remains
>>>in the wilderness also identify the woman, as the 1,260 days is a
>>>representation of a symbolic three years and a half. It is not a literal
>>>three years and a half, as in the Roman calendar, the number of days
>>>would be about 1,278 or 1,279 days, and in the Jewish calendar, either
>>>about 1,240 or 1,270 days, depending on whether an extra month was
>>>included in the period. 1,260 days is a mystical three and a half years,
>>>like the 1,290 days and the 1,335 days of Daniel 12. These are all
>>>similar, because they fit the pattern of "a time, times and a half,"
>>>also mentioned in Daniel 12. The two numbers in Daniel 12:11-12 each
>>>represent three and a half years, where months are 30 days, and the
>>>units of the first year differ from the rest.
>>>1,290 days = 13*30 + 2*12*30 + 12*30/2 1,335 days = 12*30 + 2*13*30 +
>>>13*30/2 Compare the above with:
>>>1,260 days = 12*30 + 2*12*30 +12*30/2
>> Many things in the NT are prefigured in the OT.
I can't believe you are a number cruncher.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:1otdg5l1v9s5vf9iq...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:22:04 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:67vag59q5bfqm4bcf...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>> Tsk, tsk, herman. I can tell you until I'm blue in the face that the
>>>> Mother of God has no dignity, and swoosh, it'll sail right over your
>>>> head.
>>
>>>The Church Eternal has no dignity?
>>
>> Spell checker. The Mother of God has no divinity.
>
>...and he keeps on speaking the Babylonian blasphemies.
Yada, yada, yada. You don't even know what you're talking about, and no body
else knows either.
>One more time for the fool: The CHURCH ETERNAL is the "mother" of God. Mary
>was mother of Jesus.
The Church is the Bride of Christ. He is the bridegroom.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:vrtdg5p0n9qsm83r9...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:22:40 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:2bvag517vl1mnkk95...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:20:08 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:tum8g59vo8dfov28d...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>> I stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's a greater conflict of terms than "military intelligence."
>>>>
>>>> But it is the teachings of Christ.
>>>
>>>Nope.
>>>
>>>Less than half and fading...
>>
>> Like I said, I'll stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>
>That's an oxymoron, moron.
One repeats the other. Where were you led astray?
Doug
article <oh6gg5dliri895av1...@4ax.com>:
The 12 stars are probably symbolic of the 12 apostles. Mary was not
promised a crown of 12 stars, but those who follow Christ are said to
reign with him. Jesus said, "when the Son of man shall sit in the throne
of his glory" those who follow him will "sit upon twelve thrones, judging
the twelve tribes of Israel." [Mat. 19:28] In the NT "the twelve tribes
of Israel" is a label that applies to the church.
>
>>Philippians 2:14-16
>>Do all things without murmurings and disputings: That ye may be
>>blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of
>>a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the
>>world;
>>Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ,
>>that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.
>
>>The woman in heaven is clothed with the sun because Christ is her light.
>
> Of course she is. She is the mother of the Word become man.
>
>>Isaiah 60:19
>>The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall
>>the moon give light unto thee: but the LORD shall be unto thee an
>>everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.
>
>>> The
>>> Roman Catholic Church cherishes her as Mary, and declares Mary as
>>> Queen of Heaven.
>
>>The idea of the "Mother of the Gods" has its roots in paganism, in the
>>worship of Cybele, a Phrygian mother goddess whose worship was imported
>>to Rome in about 205 BC. Cybele was revered as "The Mother of All" or
>>"The Great Mother of the Gods".
>
> a. Eve, the first woman, rejected God and told him "no". b. Mary, the
> new Eve, said let it be done according to God's will.
>
> c. The first queen worshipped Baal
> d. The second queen is the mother of the Word become man.
That is because the woman in heaven represents not Mary, but the church.
The "birth" referred to in vs. 5 is not the birth of Jesus as a human,
but his resurrection, when he became the "firstborn from the dead."
Col. 1:18
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the
firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
>
>>Scholars have connected her worship with the introduction of worship of
>>the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La Mère des dieux: De Cybele à la
>>Vierge Marie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>
>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the
>>> Church that Jesus founded.
>
>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>> And Mary.
>
>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>
> See above.
The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication of
Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal devout
Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
Mark 6:2-4
2 And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue:
and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man
these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even
such mighty works are wrought by his hands?
3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and
Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And
they were offended at him.
This suggests Jesus had brothers and sisters, and if so Mary was no
virgin. In fact the Jews even accused Mary of being promiscuous, as
implied here:
John 8:41
Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of
fornication; we have one Father, even God.
>
>> as being
>>Coredemptrix or Mediatrix or Mother of the Church
>
> Mary has no divinity. She brought, and brings, Christ to us.
Like the other saints who have died, Mary awaits the resurrection.
>
>> or being a perpetual virgin
>
> Bible totally silent here.
No, it isn't. It says she had a husband, Joseph, who "knew her not till
she had brought forth her firstborn son." This implies that after the
birth of Jesus, they had a normal marriage relationship.
Matthew 1:19-31
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her
a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD
appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not
to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of
the Holy Ghost.
21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS:
for he shall save his people from their sins.
22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of
the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and
they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with
us.
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had
bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he
called his name JESUS.
After the birth of Jesus, there is no reason why Joseph would not have
rendered to his wife "due benevolence" as is normal in marriage.
1 Cor. 7:3
Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also
the wife unto the husband.
>
>> and the NT says nothing about her Assumption etc.
>
> Full of grace. See Luke 1.
The "Assumption" doctrine was introduced in the fifth and sixth
centuries. It contradicts what Paul wrote to Timothy. According to Paul,
Christ is the only one who has immortality, as mentioned in vs. 16 below.
1 Timothy 6:13-16
13 I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and
before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good
confession;
14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the
appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only
Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can
approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and
power everlasting. Amen.
--
Doug
Bear
>>>the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La M�re des dieux: De Cybele � la
>>>Vierge Marie. Paris: �ditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>>
>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the
>>>> Church that Jesus founded.
>>
>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>> And Mary.
>>
>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>
>> See above.
>
>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication of
>Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal devout
>Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>
What my responses to Doug's post are about, is his false accusations,
changing scripture to support his blasphemous doctrine, selectively
editing of materials to say what he wants them to say, quoting
scripture out of context and, his blatant lies. I can, and have,
proven that Doug is guilty of every one of these charges that I make.
I have made them numerous times and not once has Doug refuted them, or
even tried to. If anyone accused me of what I accuse Doug of, I would
definitely take it personally, unless, I could not prove the
accusations to be false. In that case, I would perhaps try some of
the tactics Doug tries, i.e. intimidation, ridicule, veiled threats
and ignoring anything that I had no answer for.
Multiple times I have offered to stop responding to Doug's post, if,
he would stop asserting scripture saying things that it plainly does
not say, he has refused every offer.
As illustrated below, I have stated quite clearly the reason for my
responding to his post.
"I know that Doug does not have the guts to answer my questions and/or
respond to the points made, and that is ok because the only reason
that I respond to his idiotic posts is to inform any one that is not
that familiar with scripture or his writings, that they should be
aware of his blasphemy of God's word and in actuality, promoting the
agenda of Satan, either
consciously or unconsciously.
Bear
Doug
article <2megg556gab1u0e3m...@4ax.com>:
>>>>of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La Mère des dieux: De Cybele à
>>>>la Vierge Marie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>>>
>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the
>>>>> Church that Jesus founded.
>>>
>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>> And Mary.
>>>
>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>
>>> See above.
>>
>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication of
>>Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal devout
>>Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>
Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
The Israelites in the wilderness who refused too enter the promised land,
because they lacked faith, believed the report of the spies who viewed
themselves as "grasshoppers," or locusts, in comparison to the people who
dwelt there. So the faithless Israelites are compared to locusts in
prophecies of the OT, such as Joel 1 & 2, and in the NT as well, in
Revelation 9. They make a noise like the sound of chariots and horses
running to battle; a loud, clattering sound, that makes no sense! And so
Ted's response, which is mere "noise," that makes no sense at all, has
been enhanced to show this:
"clatter clackety clatter clatter clatter clatter What hiss clack my
clackety responses clatter clackety squeak clatter clatter clack to
clatter clatter clack clatter clatter clack clatter clatter Doug's
clackety clatter post clatter are clackety clatter snarl about, clatter
squeak clackety clatter is his squeak clatter clackety clack false
clatter hiss accusations, clatter clack changing clatter squeak growl
clatter scripture clack clatter clackety growl squeak clackety to clatter
clack clatter clatter snarl clatter clackety clack squeak hiss clatter
support his clack blasphemous clackety doctrine, clatter snarl clackety
clatter selectively squeak snarl squeak clackety editing clack clatter
clatter clackety clackety clatter snarl squeak clatter of materials
squeak squeak clatter clatter to clack hiss clatter squeak say clatter
clatter clack clatter clatter what clatter he wants hiss clatter clatter
them clatter to clackety clatter clackety snarl clackety clack clackety
say, clatter clack snarl clack squeak clatter clatter growl quoting
clatter clatter scripture clack out growl clackety clatter clatter
clackety growl clackety clatter clatter of snarl squeak context clatter
snarl growl clackety clackety and, clackety clackety clack clatter
clatter hiss clatter clatter clack squeak his snarl clatter blatant
clatter clackety hiss clackety lies. I clackety clackety squeak hiss
growl clackety clack can, squeak snarl clatter and clatter clatter clack
clatter have, proven hiss squeak clatter snarl that clatter growl Doug
clackety clack is squeak guilty growl of squeak clatter clatter every
clackety clatter hiss clatter clatter clack one clatter of clack clack
clatter clatter clack these clackety clatter charges clack growl clackety
snarl clatter clackety that clatter clackety squeak clatter I clatter
squeak snarl squeak make. clatter clackety squeak clatter I squeak have
clatter clatter clatter made clack clatter clatter clack clatter them
clatter numerous clatter times squeak squeak hiss clatter growl clatter
and clatter clatter clackety snarl clack not clackety growl clackety
clack once clatter has clackety Doug clatter clatter clatter clatter
squeak growl clatter clatter refuted clackety squeak them, squeak clatter
clackety or clatter clatter even clatter snarl clatter hiss clatter
clackety tried clatter clatter clack clatter clatter clack squeak to.
squeak If growl squeak clatter clatter clatter squeak anyone snarl
clatter squeak growl clack clack accused growl clatter squeak clatter
clackety clatter clatter me clatter clackety snarl clatter squeak
clackety of clatter clatter clackety clatter growl clack clatter clackety
what clack I squeak clatter clatter clatter accuse clackety clatter
clackety snarl clackety Doug clackety clatter of, clackety clack hiss
squeak clackety clatter I snarl squeak would squeak hiss clatter
definitely squeak squeak clackety hiss clack clackety clackety clack take
hiss clack it clatter clackety personally, clatter clatter clack unless,
clack snarl clackety clackety clatter hiss clack clatter clatter I
clatter clatter clatter clackety growl clack clatter could clatter clack
not clack clatter hiss prove clatter snarl clatter clatter clack clatter
clack clatter the clatter squeak accusations snarl clatter to squeak
clackety clatter clatter clatter clatter squeak be false. clatter growl
In clatter hiss clackety clatter clatter that clatter squeak clatter
clatter snarl clack snarl case, clatter clackety squeak hiss clatter
clackety I clackety clatter clatter would clack clatter growl clackety
perhaps clatter growl clatter clack squeak hiss hiss clatter try clackety
clatter clatter some squeak clatter of clatter the snarl clack clack
tactics clackety clatter Doug clatter squeak tries, clatter hiss clatter
clackety squeak hiss clatter squeak hiss squeak i.e. clackety squeak
growl clatter clatter clatter clatter snarl clatter clatter clatter
intimidation, clatter growl ridicule, clatter veiled clackety clackety
snarl squeak squeak clack threats clatter clatter and clatter ignoring
clackety clackety clatter clatter growl anything clatter clatter clatter
snarl clatter clatter clatter growl clatter that hiss clatter clatter
clack hiss clack hiss clackety clatter I squeak clatter had no clackety
answer squeak clackety clatter snarl clatter for. clackety growl squeak
clackety clatter"
> Bear
--
Doug
Bear
>>>>>of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La M�re des dieux: De Cybele �
>>>>>la Vierge Marie. Paris: �ditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the
>>>>>> Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>
>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>
>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>
>>>> See above.
>>>
>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication of
>>>Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal devout
>>>Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>>
>
>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
>
Doug
article <7pmgg5l4pslkmiqdf...@4ax.com>:
>>>>>>of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La Mère des dieux: De Cybele
>>>>>>à la Vierge Marie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the
>>>>>>> Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>>
>>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>>
>>>>> See above.
>>>>
>>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication of
>>>>Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal devout
>>>>Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>>>
>>>>
>>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
Yes, Crossville must be the locust capital of the state of Tennessee! For
a small community, the sure is a lot of "clatter" coming from there,
mostly generated by Ted! Here is some more of the "noise" of the locusts;
don't expect it to make sense!
squeak clatter clatter clatter "I squeak squeak clatter know clackety
that clatter Doug squeak does not clack clack have clatter clatter the
clatter clackety guts clatter to clatter clack answer clatter clack my
squeak questions squeak and/or clatter clackety respond to clatter the
clackety points made, clack clatter and clatter clackety that is clatter
ok clackety because clack clatter the clackety squeak clack only reason
clackety clatter clatter that I clackety respond to his idiotic clatter
clack posts clack is squeak clatter to inform clatter clatter clatter any
one clackety squeak clackety squeak that clack is squeak not clack squeak
squeak squeak that squeak familiar squeak clackety with scripture clack
or clackety squeak his clack writings, clack that squeak squeak clack
they should clatter be aware of clatter clackety his clack blasphemy of
clack God's clatter word clackety clackety clatter and squeak clackety
clackety in clatter actuality, clatter promoting squeak squeak the
clatter clatter agenda squeak clackety of clatter clatter squeak Satan,
clatter either clack squeak consciously clackety or clatter
unconsciously. squeak clackety
Bear
>>>>>>>of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La M�re des dieux: De Cybele
>>>>>>>� la Vierge Marie. Paris: �ditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is the
>>>>>>>> Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See above.
>>>>>
>>>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication of
>>>>>Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal devout
>>>>>Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
>
>Yes, Crossville must be the locust capital
What my responses to Doug's post are about, is his false accusations,
Doug
article <4osgg5l7peqrm8fab...@4ax.com>:
>>>>>>>>worship of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La Mère des dieux:
>>>>>>>>De Cybele à la Vierge Marie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is
>>>>>>>>> the Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication
>>>>>>of Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal
>>>>>>devout Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
>>
>>Yes, Crossville must be the locust capital
Joel's prophecy depicts the locusts making a noise like chariots, and
leaping upon the tops of mountains. Their hops are amazing! [Joel 2:5]
And this surely fits the dispensationalists, as the mountains they leap
upon are the prophecies of the Bible, that they try to interpret, and
thus sell lots of books to gullible people. The promises, covenants, and
prophecies of the scriptures are represented by mountains in prophecy;
examples include Gal. 4:24-26, where Mount Sinai represents the Mosaic
legislation; Mount Zion or Sion is the church in Heb. 12:22-23; and the
mount of Olives, which is mentioned in a prophecy of Zechariah,
represents the Olivet Discourse of Jesus. Its dividing into two halves in
Zech. 14:4 represents the two popular but flawed interpretations of the
prophecy of Jesus, by preterists and dispensationalists. Zechariah said
we should flee to the valley between those two mountains!
The dispensationalists make their greatest "hop" when they attempt to
interpret the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel; they insert a great gap of
thousands of years between the 69th week and the 70th week! What
wonderful hopppers they are! Thus they are depicted as locusts, and very
destructive ones, as Ted illustrates for us so well, in his repeated
defamation and spam.
Even Ted's defamation and spam fits the prophecy about the noise of the
locusts. The prophet Joel says they sound like the noise of chariots, and
chariot wheels just go round, and round, and round, so they would make a
loud, but boring, unintelligent clattering sound, as they rolled over the
stony streets of ancient cities and towns.
Ted's shameful spam and defamation has been enhanced below, by my
clatterize script, which produces an original version every time!
"HISS What HISS HISS CLATTER my GROWL CLATTER responses HISS to HISS
Doug's CLATTER post CLATTER CLATTER are HISS about, is SNARL his HISS
false CLATTER SNARL accusations, GROWL changing CLATTER scripture SNARL
to SNARL GROWL support SNARL GROWL CLATTER his CLATTER CLATTER
blasphemous SNARL GROWL CLATTER doctrine, selectively editing CLATTER of
GROWL SNARL materials to say HISS HISS what he wants SNARL HISS them HISS
to GROWL say, SNARL quoting SNARL HISS scripture CLATTER GROWL out GROWL
of CLATTER HISS context CLATTER HISS and, SNARL his HISS GROWL blatant
SNARL lies. HISS CLATTER I HISS SNARL can, and have, proven GROWL SNARL
SNARL that Doug CLATTER SNARL is CLATTER CLATTER HISS guilty CLATTER
GROWL SNARL of HISS every one of SNARL CLATTER CLATTER these GROWL
charges SNARL GROWL that I CLATTER make. GROWL HISS I have SNARL CLATTER
HISS CLATTER made CLATTER them numerous GROWL CLATTER times SNARL SNARL
and GROWL GROWL not CLATTER CLATTER once HISS has HISS Doug GROWL refuted
them, or CLATTER SNARL even SNARL tried to. GROWL GROWL If HISS anyone
SNARL accused SNARL me CLATTER GROWL of HISS HISS what I accuse CLATTER
SNARL Doug of, I CLATTER CLATTER CLATTER would CLATTER GROWL definitely
take SNARL it HISS personally, HISS unless, CLATTER GROWL I CLATTER could
GROWL SNARL HISS not CLATTER GROWL prove SNARL the HISS accusations
CLATTER to CLATTER be CLATTER false. HISS CLATTER CLATTER In SNARL GROWL
that case, CLATTER GROWL I CLATTER would CLATTER SNARL HISS perhaps GROWL
CLATTER try CLATTER some SNARL HISS CLATTER of the tactics Doug tries,
SNARL i.e. GROWL CLATTER intimidation, ridicule, veiled HISS threats
GROWL and GROWL ignoring anything that GROWL CLATTER I CLATTER GROWL had
no SNARL answer HISS SNARL GROWL for. GROWL CLATTER"
Bear
>>>>>>>>>worship of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La M�re des dieux:
>>>>>>>>>De Cybele � la Vierge Marie. Paris: �ditions du Seuil, 1996.]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is
>>>>>>>>>> the Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication
>>>>>>>of Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal
>>>>>>>devout Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
>>>
>>>Yes, Crossville must be the locust capital
>
>Joel's prophecy depicts the locusts making a noise like chariots,
Doug
article <rk5hg599n3ggp76ac...@4ax.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>worship of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La Mère des
>>>>>>>>>>dieux: De Cybele à la Vierge Marie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil,
>>>>>>>>>>1996.]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is
>>>>>>>>>>> the Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See above.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication
>>>>>>>>of Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal
>>>>>>>>devout Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
>>>>
>>>>Yes, Crossville must be the locust capital
>>
>>Joel's prophecy depicts the locusts making a noise like chariots,
>
Joel 2:4 compares the locusts to horses: "The appearance of them is as
the appearance of horses; and as horsemen, so shall they run."
What do the horses represent? The Psalmist provides an explanation, when
he says: "Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no
understanding: whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle, lest they
come near unto thee." [Psa. 2:9]
Horses represent people who lack understanding. The dispensationalists
lack understanding, and come against the church, the holy city, and they
misinterpret the prophecies of scripture, so in Joel's prophecy, they are
pictured by destructive locusts, which are likened to horses. Perhaps
their riders are the theories, such as dispensationalism, to which they
are subject. Zechariah said that the horses in the siege against
Jerusalem will be astonished, and their riders made mad, and every horse
will be blinded. [Zech. 12:4] In Zech. 14:15, these horses, mules,
camels, asses, are all afflicted with a plague that affects the tongue,
and the eyes, and the flesh. This is a spiritual plague, and IMO, some of
its effect is evident in Ted's responses!
Part of Ted's latest response, a repost of his previous senseless drivel
and defamation, is enhanced below, by the added clatter of the locusts,
produced by my script.
"growl clatter What my growl responses clatter snarl to hiss clatter hiss
Doug's post are growl about, snarl growl is clatter his clatter false
clatter accusations, snarl clatter clatter changing hiss clatter
scripture clatter to support clatter his blasphemous hiss clatter clatter
doctrine, snarl selectively snarl growl editing hiss of materials snarl
to hiss clatter say hiss what clatter he hiss clatter wants snarl clatter
them hiss to say, quoting snarl snarl scripture out of context clatter
and, hiss his clatter hiss clatter blatant growl clatter lies. I clatter
can, and clatter have, clatter proven clatter that hiss Doug is guilty
snarl of growl every one clatter hiss hiss of these snarl snarl charges
hiss hiss that growl clatter I make. snarl clatter I clatter have made
snarl clatter them snarl numerous clatter clatter times and not growl
clatter once clatter clatter snarl has growl clatter Doug refuted clatter
clatter them, snarl or clatter clatter clatter even clatter snarl tried
to. clatter If anyone growl snarl hiss accused clatter me snarl clatter
of growl clatter what growl I accuse clatter clatter Doug clatter of,
snarl I would definitely growl growl take clatter it personally, clatter
hiss clatter unless, clatter hiss hiss I could not growl snarl prove
snarl the clatter accusations clatter to growl clatter growl be hiss hiss
false. clatter In snarl that case, clatter snarl I snarl snarl would
growl perhaps try growl hiss clatter some snarl clatter snarl of the
tactics growl Doug tries, i.e. clatter intimidation, ridicule, clatter
veiled clatter hiss threats growl snarl and growl ignoring hiss growl
anything growl that clatter I had hiss clatter no answer hiss growl for.
growl"
Bear
>>>>>>>>>>>worship of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La M�re des
>>>>>>>>>>>dieux: De Cybele � la Vierge Marie. Paris: �ditions du Seuil,
>>>>>>>>>>>1996.]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC is
>>>>>>>>>>>> the Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>>>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> See above.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the dedication
>>>>>>>>>of Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a Jew in a normal
>>>>>>>>>devout Jewish family, which was well known to the Jews.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, Crossville must be the locust capital
>>>
Ike E 11/16/09
[snip]
>>Mary is NOT the "Mother of God" NOR "the Queen of Heaven:" Those are
>>BABYLONIAN blasphemies.
>
> They're right out of your bible, herman.
Nope.
> Your major mistake...
I've made no mistake.
[snip]
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
"Doug" <t...@sentex.net> wrote in message
news:c-KdnXHb98TUpZXW...@sentex.net...
[snip]
> The 12 stars are probably symbolic of the 12 apostles. Mary was not
> promised a crown of 12 stars...
One more time for the moron: The passage is a REHASH of Matthew's infancy
narrative.
Anything beyond that, you're not prepared to understand.
[snip]
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
"Bear" <tevan...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:2megg556gab1u0e3m...@4ax.com...
[snip]
> What my responses to Doug's post are about, is his false accusations,
> changing scripture to support his blasphemous doctrine, selectively
> editing of materials to say what he wants them to say, quoting
> scripture out of context and, his blatant lies.
Just like you.
> I can, and have,
> proven that Doug is guilty of every one of these charges that I make.
As I have you.
> I have made them numerous times and not once has Doug refuted them, or
> even tried to.
Neither have you.
> If anyone accused me of what I accuse Doug of, I would
> definitely take it personally, unless, I could not prove the
> accusations to be false.
Hypocrite: You've been doing the same damn thing FOR DAYS.
> In that case, I would perhaps try some of
> the tactics Doug tries, i.e. intimidation, ridicule, veiled threats
> and ignoring anything that I had no answer for.
You mean, just like you?
[snip]
> "I know that Doug does not have the guts to answer my questions and/or
> respond to the points made, and that is ok because the only reason
> that I respond to his idiotic posts is to inform any one that is not
> that familiar with scripture or his writings, that they should be
> aware of his blasphemy of God's word and in actuality, promoting the
> agenda of Satan, either
> consciously or unconsciously.
Just as I do to your false teachings, and I get the same response from you
that you get from Doug, which only underlies your hypocrisy.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:04:11 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:hrsdg558dh78g7b2o...@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:03:25 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:t0uag5dk1bjf5hiqt...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:18:21 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:1im8g5tsih0m56fdo...@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Nope. The REMNANT will be the correction of both.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And where will this remnant be consummated? Your turn, herman.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Quit trying to waste my time with your pointless diversions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very good, herman. It was very obvious you didn't have a clue.
>>>>> Remember,
>>>>> Christianity is the next step and final correction to Judaism.
>>>>
>>>>Nope.
>>>>
>>>>God has a third step coming, and YOU AIN'T IT.
>>>
>>> But when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
>>
>>What does it matter to you? You STILL ain't it.
>
> Neither are you.
Never claimed I was, moron.
> You have to do more than talk the talk, herman. So again I
> ask: when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
WHAT IS THAT TO YOU, moron?
Cite the word "Jews" in ANY OF THE ABOVE PASSAGES, moron.
JEWS are one thing.
ISRAELITES are ANOTHER.
>>> After Jewish righteousness comes Jesus, the correction to Judaism..
>>Nope.
>
> Heb 8:7-13.
Written by a fraud.
Now make your case from what JESUS said.
You can't--He never said it.
>>And you're "boasting against the root" fool.
>
> The root of Jessie is the new covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-33 says so.
Cite "The root of Jessie" anywhere in Jeremiah 31:31-33.
Nope, the scriptural facts of which you are totally unaware, because of your
arrogance.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:06:36 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:1otdg5l1v9s5vf9iq...@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:22:04 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:67vag59q5bfqm4bcf...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>>> Tsk, tsk, herman. I can tell you until I'm blue in the face that the
>>>>> Mother of God has no dignity, and swoosh, it'll sail right over your
>>>>> head.
>>>
>>>>The Church Eternal has no dignity?
>>>
>>> Spell checker. The Mother of God has no divinity.
>>
>>...and he keeps on speaking the Babylonian blasphemies.
>
> Yada, yada, yada.
Fact, fact, fact: Mary is NOT the Mother of God--the Church Eternal is. That
was the point Jesus drove home.
Unfortunately, you Babylonians can't stand not having your Satan-image
fertility goddess around.
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:07:06 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:vrtdg5p0n9qsm83r9...@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:22:40 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:2bvag517vl1mnkk95...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:20:08 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>>>>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:tum8g59vo8dfov28d...@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That's a greater conflict of terms than "military intelligence."
>>>>>
>>>>> But it is the teachings of Christ.
>>>>
>>>>Nope.
>>>>
>>>>Less than half and fading...
>>>
>>> Like I said, I'll stay with the RCC, and Holy Scripture on these.
>>
>>That's an oxymoron, moron.
>
> One repeats the other.
Yes, you do keep reproving the fact that you're a moron.
Ike
Doug
article <v4dhg5l60qhk76bas...@4ax.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>worship of the virgin Mary. [Philippe Borgeaud, La Mère des
>>>>>>>>>>>>dieux: De Cybele à la Vierge Marie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil,
>>>>>>>>>>>>1996.]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure others could see other things there. But the RCC
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the Church that Jesus founded.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The woman of Rev. 12 is identified as the church
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And Mary.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>The Spirit who inspired Simeon did not say anything about Mary
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> See above.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>The appearance of Mary and Joseph at the temple for the
>>>>>>>>>>dedication of Jesus was to fulfil the law. Jesus was raised a
>>>>>>>>>>Jew in a normal devout Jewish family, which was well known to
>>>>>>>>>>the Jews.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Oh, it looks like the locusts from Crossville, TN are loose!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes, Crossville must be the locust capital
>>>>
> What my responses to Doug's post are about, is his false accusations,
> changing scripture to support his blasphemous doctrine, selectively
> editing of materials to say what he wants them to say, quoting scripture
> out of context and, his blatant lies. I can, and have, proven that Doug
> is guilty of every one of these charges that I make.
In the prophecy of Revelation 12, the great red dragon persecutes the
woman in heaven, who represents the church of God. In verse 10 the dragon
is called "the accuser of the brethren." IMO, this is what Ted's
accusations and defamation are really about!
Most dispensationalists follow the teachings of John N. Darby, who denied
that this woman in heaven represents the church. Darby wrote, "The woman
is not the Church." Here are Darby's comments on the first few verses of
chapter 12 from his Notes on the Apocalypse.
<quote>
Verses 1--6 place before us the actors in this scene, viz., a woman with
child of Him who is the object of all the counsels of God, and the vessel
of His power on earth, while herself weak (she is, according to his
counsels, clothed with supreme glory); ... The woman is not the
Church. ... The woman, ... who was clothed with the sun, remains on the
earth, and is in the desert. As soon as we are obliged to seek the woman
on earth, it can be none else but the Jews. The Church is only in
heavenly places, but she is not known on earth. Jerusalem is the centre
where God recognizes his people.
</quote>
Darby taught that the woman is Israel, and that the woman's child being
taken up to heaven pictures the rapture! Below are some more comments on
the woman's identification from Darby, where he says "the child, Christ,
and the assembly with Christ, is caught away to God and His throne,"
referring to his "rapture" doctrine, and placing the scene of the woman
fleeing to the wilderness for 1,260 days yet future.
John Darby's Synopsis of the New Testament
http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/dsn/view.cgi?book=re&chapter=012
<quote>
Revelation 12
Chapter 12 gives us a brief but all-important summary of the whole course
of events, viewed, not in their instruments on earth or the judgment of
these, but the divine view of all the principles at work, the state of
things as revealed of God. The first symbolical person, subject of the
prophecy and result of all God's ways in it, is a woman clothed with the
sun, having a crown of twelve stars, and the moon under her feet. It is
Israel, or Jerusalem as its centre as in the purpose of God (compare Is
9:6 and Psalms 87:6). She is clothed with supreme authority, invested
with the glory of perfect administration in man, and all the original
reflected glory of this under the old covenant, under her feet. She was
travailing in childbirth, distressed, and in pain to be delivered: on the
other hand Satan's power in the form of the Roman Empire, complete in
forms of power, seven heads, but incomplete in administrative supremacy-
ten, not twelve horns. But Satan, as the open infidel enemy of God and
God's power in Christ, sought to devour the child as soon as born, who
was to have the rule of the earth from God. But the child, Christ, and
the assembly with Christ, is caught away to God and His throne - does not
receive the power yet, but is placed in the very source of it from which
it flows. It is not the rapture as regards joy; for it goes back to
Christ Himself, but the placing Him and the assembly in and with Him, in
the seat from which power flows for the establishment of the kingdom.
There is no time for this: Christ and the assembly are all one. But the
woman-the Jews, after this fly into the wilderness, where God has
prepared a place for them, for the half-week.
The assembly, or heavenly saints, (as Christ, note,) go up to heaven to
be out of the way. The Jews, or earthly ones, are protected by
providential care upon earth. This gives the whole state of things, and
those in view in this scene, and their respective places. She that is to
have glory and hold power in the earth is cast out. The child that is to
have power, in and from heaven, is previously taken up there. This makes
the position very clear.
The historical course of events is now pursued, the child being supposed
to be already caught up. There is war in heaven; and the devil and his
angels are cast out, and have no more place there. This brings out yet
more clearly the distinction of the heavenly saints and the Jewish
remnant. The heavenly ones had overcome the accuser by the blood of the
Lamb, and the word of their testimony; the woman's seed have the
commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, that is, the
Spirit of prophecy. What they have of God in the word is according to the
Old Testament.
</quote>
Darby and his followers departed from the traditional view of devout
scholars of the church over many centuries about the identity of the
woman in heaven in Revelation 12. Below is a summary representing the
more traditional interpretation, by James Burton Coffman.
James Burton Coffman's Commentaries on the Old and New Testament
http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=re&chapter=012
<quote>
Rev. 12:1
And a great sign was seen in heaven: a woman arrayed with the sun, and
the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars;
The woman, of course, is a symbol of the "whole family of God" (Ephesians
3:15; 3:15 ), including especially the true Israel of both the Old
Testament and the New Testament. It includes Christians, because later in
the chapter, they are indicated as children of the woman; and it includes
the Old Testament Israel, because through them the Messiah was born. This
view, with modifications of it, is widely accepted:
She is the one church, the Una Sancta
She is the church in both dispensations.
She is the whole family of Israel.
She is the messianic community, the ideal Israel.
She is the body of the redeemed people of God.
She is the people of God of both the old covenant and the new covenant.
She is the Old Testament Israel and the New Testament church.
...
Verse 2
and she was with child; and she crieth out, travailing in birth, and in
pain to be delivered.
Travailing in birth ...
This is a fitting metaphor for the long endurance, patience, and
suffering of God's ancient people (the true spiritual seed of Abraham)
who were a despised minority of the proud, secular Israel during the long
period of waiting for the birth of the Messiah. At times, there must have
been many, like Elijah, who felt that they were utterly alone, and like
the prophets must have prayed for God to "take away" their lives (1 Kings
18:22; 19:4). This was a time of "waiting for the consolation of
Israel" (Luke 2:25).
</quote>
Coffman's approach acknowledges the continuity of the saints of the OT
with those of the NT, in agreement with Eph. 2:20, where the prophets and
apostles are the foundation of the church.
Below are some quotes from several other commentators, about the
identification of the woman in heaven in Revelation 12, all of which
identify her with the Christian church. Darby and his followers, and some
who identify the woman with Mary, oppose this interpretation.
A plaine discovery of the whole revelation of S. John, by John Napier
(1611). Proposition 22:
<quote>
The woman clad with the sun [chap. 12] is the true Church of God. This is
proved, first, by the Song of Solomon, where Solomon, bearing the figure
of Christ, his beloved Woman and Spouse, throughout all that Canticle,
beareth the figure of Christ's Church. Secondly spiritual Jerusalem,
which is Christ's Church by diverse scriptures, is also called Christ's
Spouse in the Revelation. Thirdly, bodily marriage, is by Saint Paul
called a Symbol, and a Sacrament of the union of Christ, and the Woman
espoused representeth the Church. Fourthly, in the whole Scriptures,
idolatrie being called spirituall whoredome, necessarily the true
worshipping of God is represented by perfect Spousage, and the true
Church that worshippeth him, is his Spouse, and so the Church of God is
figured by a Woman. Last of all, the whole tokens of this Woman,
contained in the text so viuely and perfectly agree with Christes Church
(as is declared in the principall treatise) that necessarily wee must
conclude, this woman to meane the true Church of God.
</quote>
Isaac Newton, Observations Upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the
Apocalypse of St. John:
<quote>
In the Prophecy, the affairs of the Church begin to be considered at the
opening of the fifth seal; and in the Interpretation, they begin at the
same time with the vision of the Church in the form of a woman in
heaven ... she is represented by a woman in the Temple of heaven, clothed
with the sun of righteousness, and the moon of Jewish ceremonies under
her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars relating to the
twelve Apostles and to the twelve tribes of Israel.
</quote>
Matthew Henry's Bible Commentary:
<quote>
We see how the church is represented in this vision. (1.) As a woman, the
weaker part of the world, but the spouse of Christ, and the mother of the
saints. (2.) As clothed with the sun, the imputed righteousness of the
Lord Jesus Christ. Having put on Christ, who is the Sun of righteousness,
she, by her relation to Christ, is invested with honourable rights and
privileges, and shines in his rays.
</quote>
The Geneva Study Bible:
<quote>
(1) Until now it has been the general prophecy, ... the beginning of the
Church is described in this chapter, and the progress of it in the
chapter following. The beginning of the Christian Church we define as the
first moment of the conception of Christ, until the time in which this
church was weaned and taken away from the breast or milk of her mother:
which is the time when the Church of the Jews with their city and temple
was overthrown by the judgment of God. So we have in this chapter the
story of 69 years and upwards.
</quote>
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible:
<quote>
... a woman: by whom is meant, not the virgin Mary, ... nor is the church
of God, among the Jews of the former dispensation, designed; ... but the
pure apostolic church is meant, or the church of Christ, as it was in the
times of the apostles, and the first ages of Christianity...
</quote>
Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown:
<quote>
... woman clothed with the sun . . . moon under her feet--the Church,
Israel first, and then the Gentile Church; clothed with Christ, "the Sun
of righteousness." "Fair as the moon, clear as the sun." Clothed with the
Sun, the Church is the bearer of divine supernatural light in the world.
</quote>
B. W. Johnson's Bible Commentary:
<quote>
A woman clothed with the sun. A woman is used as a symbol many times in
the Scriptures. "Say you to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation
cometh." (Isa. 62:11.) Here the reference is to the Church. Again Paul
(Gal. 4:31) says, "Ye are not the children of the bond woman, but of the
free woman." All are agreed that here the free woman represents the
Church. Again (Rev. 21:2), John sees the New Jerusalem descending adorned
as a bride to meet her husband. The bride, the Lamb's wife, here and in
the ninth verse, indeed in every place spoken of, is the Church.
</quote>
John Wesley's Notes on the Bible:
<quote>
A woman - The emblem of the church of Christ, as she is originally of
Israel, though built and enlarged on all sides by the addition of heathen
converts; and as she will hereafter appear, when all her "natural
branches are again "grafted in." She is at present on earth; and yet,
with regard to her union with Christ, may be said to be in heaven, Eph.
ii, 6.
</quote>
Clarke's Commentary by Adam Clarke:
<quote>
That the woman here represents the true Church of Christ most
commentators are agreed. In other parts of the Apocalypse, the pure
Church of Christ is evidently portrayed by a woman. In chap. xix. 7, a
great multitude are represented as saying, "Let us be glad and rejoice,
and give honour to him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his
WIFE hath made herself ready." In chap. xxi. 9, an angel talks with St.
John, saying, "Come hither, I will show thee the BRIDE, the Lamb's wife."
That the Christian Church is meant will appear also from her being
clothed with the sun, a striking emblem of Jesus Christ, the Sun of
righteousness, the light and glory of the Church; for the countenance of
the Son of God is as the sun shineth in his strength.
</quote>
A critical and exegetical commentary on the Revelation of St. John by
Robert Henry Charles, (p. 315):
<quote>
... this woman represents the true Israel or the community of believers.
This community embraces Jewish and Gentile Christians ... But since the
woman is represented as the mother of the Messiah, the community which
she symbolizes must embrace the true O.T. Israel. ... J. Weiss (p. 137)
takes the woman to symbolize the heavenly Jerusalem, which St. Paul calls
"our mother" (Gal. iv. 26), and which thus forms a contrast to the woman
that symbolizes Babylon or Rome in chap. xvii.
</quote>
A commentary on the Revelation of John by George Eldon Ladd, (p. 167):
<quote>
The central feature of this heavenly woman is that she is the mother of
the Messiah (vs. 2). Some commentators think she represents Mary, the
mother of the Lord; others Israel, the people who gave birth to Messiah.
It is true that Isaiah 66:7 pictures Zion as being in travail to give
birth to the new redeemed Israel (See Isa. 26:17; Mic. 4:10); but this
heavenly woman is mother both of Messiah and of the actual church on
earth (her "offspring," vs. 17). Therefore, it is easier to understand
the woman in a somewhat broader sense as the ideal Zion, the heavenly
representative of the people of God (Isa. 54:1; 66:7-9). Paul gives a
clue to the meaning of the heavenly woman when he speaks of the Jerusalem
which is above, who is the mother of the people of God on earth (Gal.
4:26).
</quote>
The great red dragon is pictured **persecuting** the woman, and her seed,
those who have "the testimony of Jesus," which Darby declares to be the
spirit of prophecy. So, who can be surprised to see those nasty,
defamatory, hostile attacks, clear examples of persecution, from Ted
Evans the dispensationalist of Crossville, TN? Persecution, defamation,
bullying, and false accusations are all things that identify those who
are deceived, stars that follow the tail of the dragon to the earth.
[Rev. 12:4]
--
Doug
Bear
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Bear" <tevan...@charter.net> wrote in message
>news:2megg556gab1u0e3m...@4ax.com...
>
>
>Just like you.
>
Trying to do my part in keeping the public informed of Ike's
outstanding qualifications.
Ike thinks he is the smartest man who ever was, is now the smartest
man and will always be the smartest man, and he proves it with his
dogmatic assertions and analysis of the poles as demonstrated by his
quotes below.
[So, the INTERNAL DATA is STARTING TO LOOK LIKE IT DID BACK IN
SEPTEMBER, AND SHIFTING TO THE RIGHT AGAIN.]
or this one...
[Try looking at the INTERNAL data sometime--your "poll of polls" is
OVERINFLATED PUSH-POLLING CRAP.]
Now this is really indicative of Ike's version of the "truth".
[It's shaping up to be another GOP map.]
or this, has about the same value as his scripture commentary...
[Hey, idiot: HOW COME THE INTERNALS AREN'T MOVING BEYOND NORMAL
STATISTICAL ANOMALIES OF A POINT UP OR DOWN AS THE BATTLELINES
SOLIDIFY?]
right on mark again...
[WORSE, they subject to manipulation BY THE POLLSTERS THEMSELVES,
deliberately AND accidentally.]
[You MIGHT want to start paying attention TO THE BASIC POLLING,
Because IT MAY BE SAYING MORE THAN THE "PROFESSIONALS" DO.]
same dogmatic assertion as he makes with scripture, and just as wrong.
[And even THAT data is showing A MONUMENTAL SHIFT from OBAMA to
MCCAIN.]
yep, Ike has it all figured out...
[VoteFromAbroad.org IS ALREADY SHOWING MCCAIN TAKING THE LEAD, 270 to
268, with MORE SHIFTS TO COME from Washington, Michigan, and
Pennsylvania.]
how did everyone in the country miss this but Ike?
[EVEN NEW YORK STATE IS SHOWING A SHIFT TO THE GOP TICKET (and don't
be surprised if Giuliani Dems and the HUGE number of housewives in
up-state DON'T PUSH THE GOP WAY OVER THE TOP).]
[The rest of the electoral maps WILL SHORTLY FOLLOW SUIT.]
nothing wishy-washy about Ike's observations.
[By this time next week, the electoral college WILL SHOW THE SAME
REVERSAL AS IN THE GENERAL POLLING NUMBERS, with McCain have a HUGE
ADVANTAGE over Obama.]
same dogmatic, know it all tone as he has with scripture and the same
accuracy.
[This race is over--it ended last week.]
[Just like I told you last week concerning the general polling numbers
(and was right): WAIT FOR IT--it'll be along shortly.]
Ike provides a great demonstration of his analytical and interpreting
skills. He did come closer with the polls however than he does with
scripture.
Bear
>Ike
>
Bear
>>>>>
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> But when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
>>>What does it matter to you? You STILL ain't it.
>> Neither are you.
>Never claimed I was, moron.
Yet you brought it up, and can't even suggest when it will be.
>> You have to do more than talk the talk, herman. So again I
>> ask: when will the imagined 3rd step take place, herman?
>WHAT IS THAT TO YOU, moron?
I say you're all bullshit and no substance. So when?
It's the Jewish old covenant, Herman.
>JEWS are one thing.
>ISRAELITES are ANOTHER.
More herman bullshit.
>>>> After Jewish righteousness comes Jesus, the correction to Judaism..
>>>Nope.
>> Heb 8:7-13.
>Written by a fraud.
The Collegeville Bible Commentary calls it one of the most literary pieces in
the NT, a sermon and not a letter.
>>>And you're "boasting against the root" fool.
>> The root of Jessie is the new covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-33 says so.
>Cite "The root of Jessie" anywhere in Jeremiah 31:31-33.
It's the new covenant in Christ, herman.
>> In other words, you're reduced to babbling bs.
>Nope, the scriptural facts of which you are totally unaware, because of your
>arrogance.
Nobody can find your babbling bullshit in the bible, herman.
duke
<xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:iatdg5pndtqsd43rd...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:06:41 -0600, "Ike E 11/16/09"
>> <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>>Mary is NOT the "Mother of God" NOR "the Queen of Heaven:" Those are
>>>BABYLONIAN blasphemies.
>>
>> They're right out of your bible, herman.
>
>Nope.
>
>> Your major mistake...
>
>I've made no mistake.
None minor.