Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Dante's Delight
5 views
Skip to first unread message
James
May 12, 2013, 12:04:42 PM5/12/13
to
(compliments of the churches of Christendom)
Ingredients:
--large quantity of living spirit bodies
--large quantity of living human bodies
--assorted variety of worms.
--several bags of brimstone (sulfur)
--any beast
--a false prophet
--death.
--your beloved son
--two hot ovens
First, get an oven as hot as it gets. Make sure flames are present.
(Have the second oven standing by for later)
Toss in your son. (Ac 2:31)
Bake for 3 days, then take him out. (Ac 10:40)
Add in the living spirit bodies. (Mt 25:41)
Also, add in the living human bodies. (Re 20:15)
For seasoning, stir in some fire-resistant worms. (Mr 9:48)
Continue to bake while you hear their tormented, agonizing,
bloodcurdling, screams. Also, make sure that everyone can hear those
screams. (Lu 16:23-25)
Heat up the 2nd oven until it is as hot as it gets. Mix in the
brimstone. Make sure flames are present. Toss in the beast and the
false prophet. Very carefully pick up death (it's hard to get a hold
of) and throw it in. (Re 20:10,14)
Next, take everything out from the first oven and toss it into the
second oven. Even toss in the first oven! (Re 20:13,14)
Continue to bake while you hear them scream, and scream, and scream...
In the meantime, smile, and announce to everyone that you are a person
full of love. You overflow with love. Your God is the very essence of
love. (1 Jo 4:8)
Makes zero servings.
**All scriptures based on KJV Bible.
James
John 4:23,24
www.jw.org
Ingredients:
--large quantity of living spirit bodies
--large quantity of living human bodies
--assorted variety of worms.
--several bags of brimstone (sulfur)
--any beast
--a false prophet
--death.
--your beloved son
--two hot ovens
First, get an oven as hot as it gets. Make sure flames are present.
(Have the second oven standing by for later)
Toss in your son. (Ac 2:31)
Bake for 3 days, then take him out. (Ac 10:40)
Add in the living spirit bodies. (Mt 25:41)
Also, add in the living human bodies. (Re 20:15)
For seasoning, stir in some fire-resistant worms. (Mr 9:48)
Continue to bake while you hear their tormented, agonizing,
bloodcurdling, screams. Also, make sure that everyone can hear those
screams. (Lu 16:23-25)
Heat up the 2nd oven until it is as hot as it gets. Mix in the
brimstone. Make sure flames are present. Toss in the beast and the
false prophet. Very carefully pick up death (it's hard to get a hold
of) and throw it in. (Re 20:10,14)
Next, take everything out from the first oven and toss it into the
second oven. Even toss in the first oven! (Re 20:13,14)
Continue to bake while you hear them scream, and scream, and scream...
In the meantime, smile, and announce to everyone that you are a person
full of love. You overflow with love. Your God is the very essence of
love. (1 Jo 4:8)
Makes zero servings.
**All scriptures based on KJV Bible.
James
John 4:23,24
www.jw.org
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 12, 2013, 1:56:38 PM5/12/13
to
Mark 14:21
The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him:
but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed!
good were it for that man
if he had never been born.
Mark Chapter 9
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off:
it is better for thee to enter into life maimed,
than having two hands to go into hell,
into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not,
and the fire is not quenched.
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off:
it is better for thee to enter halt into life,
than having two feet to be cast into hell,
into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not,
and the fire is not quenched.
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out:
it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye,
than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not,
and the fire is not quenched.
James
May 13, 2013, 10:50:17 AM5/13/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
Tell that to the churches of Christendom. They are the ones who have
created that ridiculous scenario by believing certain things literal
that were meant to be symbolic. If you carefully look up each
scripture, you will see what I mean.
created that ridiculous scenario by believing certain things literal
that were meant to be symbolic. If you carefully look up each
scripture, you will see what I mean.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 13, 2013, 1:49:15 PM5/13/13
to
On May 13, 9:50 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
"Tell that to the churches of Christendom. They are the ones who have
created that ridiculous scenario by believing certain things literal
that were meant to be symbolic. If you carefully look up each
scripture, you will see what I mean."
"Allegorical interpretation is a hermeneutical (interpretive) method
"Tell that to the churches of Christendom. They are the ones who have
created that ridiculous scenario by believing certain things literal
that were meant to be symbolic. If you carefully look up each
scripture, you will see what I mean."
used to uncover hidden or symbolic meanings of a Biblical text. Rooted
in the techniques developed by Greek thinkers who attempted to
overcome the problems posed by literal interpretations of ancient
Greek myths, the allegorical method was further developed by Jewish
scholars, such as Philo of Alexandria in the 1st century AD, and
Christian thinkers, such as Clement and Origen of Alexandria in the
2nd and 3rd centuries AD. Though other methods were often used, the
allegorical method was dominant until late medieval times. The
Protestant Reformation of the 16th century rejected, for the most
part, the allegorical method and returned to the more literal
interpretation of the Bible."
http://www.keyway.ca/htm2000/20000325.htm
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
James
May 14, 2013, 8:40:35 AM5/14/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
allegorical or literal. It all depends on the context etc. Many parts
of the Bible are literal, and many parts are symbolic. By examining
each verse, we can get to know how it sould be interpreted.
For example, many take this Scripture literally. Re 20:14,
"Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of
fire is the second death." (NIV)
Notice that "death" is tossed into an allegedly literal fire. Can
death be burned? Can it even be picked up? Of course not. Thus that
"fire" there is symbolic, which much of the book of Revelation is.
>On May 13, 9:50�am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>"Tell that to the churches of Christendom. They are the ones who have
>created that ridiculous scenario by believing certain things literal
>that were meant to be symbolic. If you carefully look up each
>scripture, you will see what I mean."
>
>"Allegorical interpretation is a hermeneutical (interpretive) method
>used to uncover hidden or symbolic meanings of a Biblical text. Rooted
>in the techniques developed by Greek thinkers who attempted to
>overcome the problems posed by literal interpretations of ancient
>Greek myths, the allegorical method was further developed by Jewish
>scholars, such as Philo of Alexandria in the 1st century AD, and
>Christian thinkers, such as Clement and Origen of Alexandria in the
>2nd and 3rd centuries AD. Though other methods were often used, the
>allegorical method was dominant until late medieval times. The
>Protestant Reformation of the 16th century rejected, for the most
>part, the allegorical method and returned to the more literal
>interpretation of the Bible."
>
>http://www.keyway.ca/htm2000/20000325.htm
Well, you can't really interpret the whole Bible either of one way;
>
>"Tell that to the churches of Christendom. They are the ones who have
>created that ridiculous scenario by believing certain things literal
>that were meant to be symbolic. If you carefully look up each
>scripture, you will see what I mean."
>
>"Allegorical interpretation is a hermeneutical (interpretive) method
>used to uncover hidden or symbolic meanings of a Biblical text. Rooted
>in the techniques developed by Greek thinkers who attempted to
>overcome the problems posed by literal interpretations of ancient
>Greek myths, the allegorical method was further developed by Jewish
>scholars, such as Philo of Alexandria in the 1st century AD, and
>Christian thinkers, such as Clement and Origen of Alexandria in the
>2nd and 3rd centuries AD. Though other methods were often used, the
>allegorical method was dominant until late medieval times. The
>Protestant Reformation of the 16th century rejected, for the most
>part, the allegorical method and returned to the more literal
>interpretation of the Bible."
>
>http://www.keyway.ca/htm2000/20000325.htm
allegorical or literal. It all depends on the context etc. Many parts
of the Bible are literal, and many parts are symbolic. By examining
each verse, we can get to know how it sould be interpreted.
For example, many take this Scripture literally. Re 20:14,
"Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of
fire is the second death." (NIV)
Notice that "death" is tossed into an allegedly literal fire. Can
death be burned? Can it even be picked up? Of course not. Thus that
"fire" there is symbolic, which much of the book of Revelation is.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 14, 2013, 9:53:21 AM5/14/13
to
On May 14, 7:40 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
"Well, you can't really interpret the whole Bible either of one way;
allegorical or literal. It all depends on the context etc. Many parts
of the Bible are literal, and many parts are symbolic. By examining
each verse, we can get to know how it sould be interpreted. "
I shall interpret the Bible by its plain meaning as my
"Well, you can't really interpret the whole Bible either of one way;
allegorical or literal. It all depends on the context etc. Many parts
of the Bible are literal, and many parts are symbolic. By examining
each verse, we can get to know how it sould be interpreted. "
conscience dictates,unlike you who let an organization
created in the late 19th century tell you how to think.
“Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian
congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how
sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this
reason the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah’s
visible organization in mind.”—The Watchtower, October 1, 1967, p. 587
http://4jehovah.org/help-jw-bible-read.php
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
James
May 15, 2013, 10:31:37 AM5/15/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
brighter as we near the end. (Isa 2:2-4)
God's organization is fulfilling Scripture as we speak. For example,
Mt 24:14,
"And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as
a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." (NIV)
Notice a "kingdom" message MUST be preached throughout the whole
world, and "then the end will come." Just look at the cover of any
Watchtower magazine and read the cover.
I know of no other religion satisfying Mt 24:14 at this time. Do you?
If you believe we are in the last days, then that MUST be going on
right now. Do you know what God's kingdom is?
>�Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian
>On May 14, 7:40�am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>"Well, you can't really interpret the whole Bible either of one way;
>allegorical or literal. It all depends on the context etc. Many parts
>of the Bible are literal, and many parts are symbolic. By examining
>each verse, we can get to know how it sould be interpreted. "
>
>
>I shall interpret the Bible by its plain meaning as my
>conscience dictates,unlike you who let an organization
>created in the late 19th century tell you how to think.
God's organization has always been around. (Pr 4:18) But it shines
>
>"Well, you can't really interpret the whole Bible either of one way;
>allegorical or literal. It all depends on the context etc. Many parts
>of the Bible are literal, and many parts are symbolic. By examining
>each verse, we can get to know how it sould be interpreted. "
>
>
>I shall interpret the Bible by its plain meaning as my
>conscience dictates,unlike you who let an organization
>created in the late 19th century tell you how to think.
brighter as we near the end. (Isa 2:2-4)
God's organization is fulfilling Scripture as we speak. For example,
Mt 24:14,
"And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as
a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." (NIV)
Notice a "kingdom" message MUST be preached throughout the whole
world, and "then the end will come." Just look at the cover of any
Watchtower magazine and read the cover.
I know of no other religion satisfying Mt 24:14 at this time. Do you?
If you believe we are in the last days, then that MUST be going on
right now. Do you know what God's kingdom is?
>�Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 15, 2013, 1:48:23 PM5/15/13
to
On May 15, 9:31 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
"God's organization has always been around."
The Jehovah's Witnesses was begun by Charles Taze Russell in 1872.
"God's organization has always been around."
So they obviously don't qualify.
So your cult was founded in 1872 and you even
got the name wrong.
"the original pronunciation must have been Yahweh"
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11305-names-of-god
Mark 4:12
That seeing they may see, and not perceive;
and hearing they may hear, and not understand;
lest at any time they should be converted,
and their sins should be forgiven them.
Yet, it is so easy to be saved.
Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
and shalt believe in thine heart
that God hath raised him from the dead,
thou shalt be saved.
James
May 16, 2013, 9:29:43 AM5/16/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
"the way" in the first century. (Acts 9:2) Then after the apostles
died off, apostasy would enter the Christian congregations and confuse
people as to where the true 'church' was. Jesus used the illustration
of the wheat and the weeds to show that false religion and the true
religion would exist side by side till the end days.
In the end days the 'true religion would shine like the sun' and many
people would stream to it. Isa 2:2-4,
" 2. And it shall come to pass in the latter days, that the mountain
of Jehovah's house shall be established on the top of the mountains,
and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto
it.
3. And many peoples shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to
the mountain of Jehovah, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will
teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion
shall go forth the law, and the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem.
4. And he will judge between the nations, and will decide concerning
many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and
their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword
against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." (ASV)
They are talking about the emergence of the JW organization. Notice vs
3, "Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah," JW's have
figuratively "beat their swords into plowshares" ect. Thus they do not
participate in this world's wars. For that, in many countries they
have been jailed or killed. But they obey the Bible first, and men
second.
>
> So your cult was founded in 1872 and you even
> got the name wrong.
> "the original pronunciation must have been Yahweh"
Nobody knows the EXACT pronunciation of the 4 letter Hebrew
Tetragrammaton YHWH, "Yahewh" is the attempt of the transliteration of
the divine name. "Jehovah" is the latinized translation version that
has been around long before JW's. (for ex, see Ps 83:18 of the 1610
KJV) Most people know who Jehovah is, but not as many know the other
names. (Yahweh, Yehwah, etc)
You are invited to come up to the house of Jehovah also, while there
is still time. (Isa 2:3)
>On May 15, 9:31 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>"God's organization has always been around."
>
>
>The Jehovah's Witnesses was begun by Charles Taze Russell in 1872.
>So they obviously don't qualify.
Witnesses for God have been around since OT times. They belonged to
>
>"God's organization has always been around."
>
>
>The Jehovah's Witnesses was begun by Charles Taze Russell in 1872.
>So they obviously don't qualify.
"the way" in the first century. (Acts 9:2) Then after the apostles
died off, apostasy would enter the Christian congregations and confuse
people as to where the true 'church' was. Jesus used the illustration
of the wheat and the weeds to show that false religion and the true
religion would exist side by side till the end days.
In the end days the 'true religion would shine like the sun' and many
people would stream to it. Isa 2:2-4,
" 2. And it shall come to pass in the latter days, that the mountain
of Jehovah's house shall be established on the top of the mountains,
and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto
it.
3. And many peoples shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to
the mountain of Jehovah, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will
teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion
shall go forth the law, and the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem.
4. And he will judge between the nations, and will decide concerning
many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and
their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword
against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." (ASV)
They are talking about the emergence of the JW organization. Notice vs
3, "Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah," JW's have
figuratively "beat their swords into plowshares" ect. Thus they do not
participate in this world's wars. For that, in many countries they
have been jailed or killed. But they obey the Bible first, and men
second.
>
> So your cult was founded in 1872 and you even
> got the name wrong.
> "the original pronunciation must have been Yahweh"
Tetragrammaton YHWH, "Yahewh" is the attempt of the transliteration of
the divine name. "Jehovah" is the latinized translation version that
has been around long before JW's. (for ex, see Ps 83:18 of the 1610
KJV) Most people know who Jehovah is, but not as many know the other
names. (Yahweh, Yehwah, etc)
You are invited to come up to the house of Jehovah also, while there
is still time. (Isa 2:3)
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 16, 2013, 10:59:16 AM5/16/13
to
On May 16, 8:29 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
The fact is your group didn't exist in 1871 A.D.
and you got the Name wrong.
To paraphrase Groucho Marx, I should believe you,
not my lying eyes.
I believe the plain Scripture.
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
and you got the Name wrong.
To paraphrase Groucho Marx, I should believe you,
not my lying eyes.
I believe the plain Scripture.
James
May 17, 2013, 8:46:13 AM5/17/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
Yes, I have a typo here. It should say "Yahweh", not "Yahewh".
>>
>> You are invited to come up to the house of Jehovah also, while there
>> is still time. (Isa 2:3)
>>
>> James
>> John 4:23,24www.jw.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11305-names-of-god
>>
>> >Mark 4:12
>> >That seeing they may see, and not perceive;
>> > and hearing they may hear, and not understand;
>> >lest at any time they should be converted,
>> >and their sins should be forgiven them.
>>
>> >Yet, it is so easy to be saved.
>>
>> >Romans 10:9
>> >That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
>> >and shalt believe in thine heart
>> > that God hath raised him from the dead,
>> > thou shalt be saved.
>
> The fact is your group didn't exist in 1871 A.D.
> and you got the Name wrong.
You never had a typo? Then congratulations, you are perfect.
You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
etc? See Isa 2:2-4 which shows in the last days an emergence of people
who go to the "house of Jehovah".
> To paraphrase Groucho Marx, I should believe you,
> not my lying eyes.
>
> I believe the plain Scripture.
>
> Romans 10:9
>That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
>and shalt believe in thine heart
> that God hath raised him from the dead,
> thou shalt be saved.
But don't forget Jesus' words about salvation at Mt 24:13,
"But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved." (NASB)
>>
>> You are invited to come up to the house of Jehovah also, while there
>> is still time. (Isa 2:3)
>>
>> James
>> John 4:23,24www.jw.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11305-names-of-god
>>
>> >Mark 4:12
>> >That seeing they may see, and not perceive;
>> > and hearing they may hear, and not understand;
>> >lest at any time they should be converted,
>> >and their sins should be forgiven them.
>>
>> >Yet, it is so easy to be saved.
>>
>> >Romans 10:9
>> >That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
>> >and shalt believe in thine heart
>> > that God hath raised him from the dead,
>> > thou shalt be saved.
>
> The fact is your group didn't exist in 1871 A.D.
> and you got the Name wrong.
You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
etc? See Isa 2:2-4 which shows in the last days an emergence of people
who go to the "house of Jehovah".
> To paraphrase Groucho Marx, I should believe you,
> not my lying eyes.
>
> I believe the plain Scripture.
>
> Romans 10:9
>That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
>and shalt believe in thine heart
> that God hath raised him from the dead,
> thou shalt be saved.
"But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved." (NASB)
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 17, 2013, 12:34:12 PM5/17/13
to
On May 17, 7:46 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
"You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
etc? "
Duh! The time of Jesus was predicted.
"You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
etc? "
“The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from
between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the
obedience of the peoples” (Genesis 49:10 NASB).
http://www.drwalt.com/blog/2011/12/23/was-jesus-birth-really-predicted-in-the-hebrew-scriptures/
After Herod the Great died, the Romans placed
a governor in Judea. There is no mention of
after 1872 A.D.
All the Apostolic Churches can trace back
to the Apostles.
1. It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may
wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the
apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a
position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted
bishops
in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to
our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like
what
these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden
mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to "the perfect"
apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them
especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches
themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very
perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving
behind
as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to
these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly,
would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away,
the direst calamity.
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as
this,
to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to
confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil
self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion,
assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say, ] by
indicating
that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very
ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome
by
the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing
out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means
of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity
that
every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-
eminent authority,6 that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the
apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those
[faithful men] who exist everywhere.
3. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the
Church,
committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of
this
Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him
succeeded
Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles,
Clement
was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed
apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have
the
preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their
traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there
were
many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles.
In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred
among
the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome despatched a most
powerful
letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their
faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from
the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of
heaven
and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called
Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spake with Moses,
set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for
the
devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so,
may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached
by
the Churches, and may also understand the apostolical tradition of
the
Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are
now
propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god
beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. To this
Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus;
then,
sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telephorus,
who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then
after
him, Anicetus. Sorer having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now,
in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the
episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical
tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have
come
down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the
same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the
apostles until now, and handed down in truth.
4. But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and
conversed
with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia,
appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early
youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very
old
man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom,7 departed this
life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the
apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are
true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also
those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time,-a man
who was of much greater weight, and a more stedfast witness of truth,
than Valentinus, and Marcion, and the rest of the heretics. He it was
who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away
from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he
had received this one and sole truth from the apostles,-that, namely,
which is handed down by the Church.8 "
Irenaeus Book III, Chapter III
PATRICK
May 17, 2013, 1:33:16 PM5/17/13
to
words....Matt 24:
9 You will be hated by all nations because of my name.
10 And then many will be led into sin; they will betray and hate one
another.
11 Many false prophets will arise and deceive many;
12 and because of the increase of evildoing, the love of many will
grow cold.
13 But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.
James
May 18, 2013, 11:01:35 AM5/18/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
those Scriptures to Jesus. Thus they would have considered Jesus a
cult religion.
Well, the Bible tells us what to look for IN FALSE RELIGIONS, no
matter how far back they go. Notice carefully what it says. The
Catholic Bible reads at 1 Ti 4:1-4,
"1. Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the last times some will
turn away from the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and
demonic instructions
2. through the hypocrisy of liars with branded consciences.
3. They forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God
created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know
the truth.
4. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be
rejected when received with thanksgiving, " (NAB)
Noctice some of the "demonic intstructions":
"They forbid marriage"
"require abstinence from foods"
I didn't make this up, nor am I mistinterpreting. This is plain
Scripture.
>On May 17, 7:46�am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>"You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
>came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
>etc? "
>
>Duh! The time of Jesus was predicted.
>�The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler�s staff from
>between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the
>obedience of the peoples� (Genesis 49:10 NASB).
>http://www.drwalt.com/blog/2011/12/23/was-jesus-birth-really-predicted-in-the-hebrew-scriptures/
Even though it was predicted, the vast majority of Jews did not apply
>
>"You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
>came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
>etc? "
>
>Duh! The time of Jesus was predicted.
>�The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler�s staff from
>between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the
>obedience of the peoples� (Genesis 49:10 NASB).
>http://www.drwalt.com/blog/2011/12/23/was-jesus-birth-really-predicted-in-the-hebrew-scriptures/
those Scriptures to Jesus. Thus they would have considered Jesus a
cult religion.
matter how far back they go. Notice carefully what it says. The
Catholic Bible reads at 1 Ti 4:1-4,
"1. Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the last times some will
turn away from the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and
demonic instructions
2. through the hypocrisy of liars with branded consciences.
3. They forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God
created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know
the truth.
4. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be
rejected when received with thanksgiving, " (NAB)
Noctice some of the "demonic intstructions":
"They forbid marriage"
"require abstinence from foods"
I didn't make this up, nor am I mistinterpreting. This is plain
Scripture.
James
May 18, 2013, 11:03:16 AM5/18/13
to
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 18, 2013, 3:40:26 PM5/18/13
to
On May 18, 10:01 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
>
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
>
> >On May 17, 7:46 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
> >"You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
> >came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
> >etc? "
>
> >Duh! The time of Jesus was predicted.
> >“The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from
> >between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the
> >obedience of the peoples” (Genesis 49:10 NASB).
> >http://www.drwalt.com/blog/2011/12/23/was-jesus-birth-really-predicte...
>
> >"You also seem to be hung up on that 1800's stuff. When Christianity
> >came along, and you were a devout Jew, would you have called it a cult
> >etc? "
>
> >Duh! The time of Jesus was predicted.
> >“The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from
> >between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the
> >obedience of the peoples” (Genesis 49:10 NASB).
Jude 1:19
These be they who separate themselves,
sensual, having not the Spirit.
James
May 19, 2013, 8:51:11 AM5/19/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
No comment on the "demonic intstructions" of the false religion?
His opinions are noted.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 19, 2013, 9:36:34 AM5/19/13
to
On May 19, 7:51 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
You changed your argument from God's organization
was always around, since your cult was founded in
1872 A.D. Jesus says,
Matthew Chapter 28
20b... lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world
>
>
> >Jude 1:19
>
> >These be they who separate themselves,
> > sensual, having not the Spirit.
>
Let's see, does fit CHARLES TAZE RUSSELL
"Not less unbecoming in this self-styled prophet was the fact that his
wife divorced him in 1897 on charges of adultery with two different
women, a stenographer and a housemaid; and that the judge flayed him,
after granting the divorce, for his general ill-treatment of his
wife. To avoid payment of the alimony ordered by the court, Russell
promptly transferred his property, worth over $240,000, to the "Watch
Tower Bible" and "Tract Society."
http://www.olrl.org/apologetics/incredjw.shtml
The most famous of Polycarp’s students was Irenaeus, for whom
Polycarp was a direct link with the apostles. Irenaeus tells how he
heard the account of Polycarp’s discussion with John the Evangelist
and with others who had personally seen Jesus.
http://livingspace.sacredspace.ie/F0223S/
was always around, since your cult was founded in
1872 A.D. Jesus says,
Matthew Chapter 28
20b... lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world
>
>
> >Jude 1:19
>
> >These be they who separate themselves,
> > sensual, having not the Spirit.
>
"Not less unbecoming in this self-styled prophet was the fact that his
wife divorced him in 1897 on charges of adultery with two different
women, a stenographer and a housemaid; and that the judge flayed him,
after granting the divorce, for his general ill-treatment of his
wife. To avoid payment of the alimony ordered by the court, Russell
promptly transferred his property, worth over $240,000, to the "Watch
Tower Bible" and "Tract Society."
http://www.olrl.org/apologetics/incredjw.shtml
Polycarp was a direct link with the apostles. Irenaeus tells how he
heard the account of Polycarp’s discussion with John the Evangelist
and with others who had personally seen Jesus.
http://livingspace.sacredspace.ie/F0223S/
James
May 21, 2013, 12:55:12 PM5/21/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
Never meant a perfect person yet, and was all your religion's leaders
perfect from the 1800's? But for the record, CHECK THE COURT'S
RECORDS. They do not show Russell on adultery charges. That was
created by his enemies. Your quoting source therefore, is
untrustworthy. Notice:
"Russell and his wife disagreed about the management of the journal,
Zion�s Watch Tower. Thereupon she voluntarily separated herself from
him after they had arranged a financial settlement to enable her to
live apart from the Society�s headquarters. This agreed separation,
however, had absolutely nothing to do with a much later divorce
proceeding (1906), charging �adultery,� as clerical enemies of Russell
slanderously tried and still try to maintain. The court records
plainly fix the lie to all those who falsely accused and even now
accuse Russell as having been an immoral man, divorced for adultery."
(1955 Watchtower, 1/15, p. 46)
If he is talking about apostolic succession, the Bible disagrees with
him. So his lies or opinions are noted.
>http://livingspace.sacredspace.ie/F0223S/
perfect from the 1800's? But for the record, CHECK THE COURT'S
RECORDS. They do not show Russell on adultery charges. That was
created by his enemies. Your quoting source therefore, is
untrustworthy. Notice:
"Russell and his wife disagreed about the management of the journal,
Zion�s Watch Tower. Thereupon she voluntarily separated herself from
him after they had arranged a financial settlement to enable her to
live apart from the Society�s headquarters. This agreed separation,
however, had absolutely nothing to do with a much later divorce
proceeding (1906), charging �adultery,� as clerical enemies of Russell
slanderously tried and still try to maintain. The court records
plainly fix the lie to all those who falsely accused and even now
accuse Russell as having been an immoral man, divorced for adultery."
(1955 Watchtower, 1/15, p. 46)
him. So his lies or opinions are noted.
>http://livingspace.sacredspace.ie/F0223S/
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 21, 2013, 1:09:33 PM5/21/13
to
You are either naive or have invincible ignorance.
They do not show Russell on adultery charges. That was
> created by his enemies. Your quoting source therefore, is
> untrustworthy. Notice:
>
> "Russell and his wife disagreed about the management of the journal,
> Zion s Watch Tower. Thereupon she voluntarily separated herself from
> him after they had arranged a financial settlement to enable her to
> live apart from the Society s headquarters. This agreed separation,
>
> read more »
James
May 22, 2013, 9:10:47 AM5/22/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
I stand by my source information. You may believe what you want.
At any rate, the true religion gets better as the days move on. Pr
4:18,
"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV)
At any rate, the true religion gets better as the days move on. Pr
4:18,
"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV)
> They do not show Russell on adultery charges. That was
>> created by his enemies. Your quoting source therefore, is
>> untrustworthy. Notice:
>>
>> "Russell and his wife disagreed about the management of the journal,
>> Zion s Watch Tower. Thereupon she voluntarily separated herself from
>> him after they had arranged a financial settlement to enable her to
>> live apart from the Society s headquarters. This agreed separation,
>> however, had absolutely nothing to do with a ...
>>
>> read more �
>> created by his enemies. Your quoting source therefore, is
>> untrustworthy. Notice:
>>
>> "Russell and his wife disagreed about the management of the journal,
>> Zion s Watch Tower. Thereupon she voluntarily separated herself from
>> him after they had arranged a financial settlement to enable her to
>> live apart from the Society s headquarters. This agreed separation,
>> however, had absolutely nothing to do with a ...
>>
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 22, 2013, 9:45:28 AM5/22/13
to
On May 22, 8:10 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
Luke 18:9-14
"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
9. And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and
the other a publican.
11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
adulterers, or even as this publican.
12. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be
merciful to me a sinner.
14. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than
the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
James
May 23, 2013, 6:05:04 AM5/23/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
""Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' but not do what I command?" (NAB)
>On May 22, 8:10�am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
>ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
>
>
> Luke 18:9-14
> 9. And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
>themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
> 10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and
>the other a publican.
> 11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
>thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
>adulterers, or even as this publican.
> 12. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
> 13. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
>as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be
>merciful to me a sinner.
>14. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than
>the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
>that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
Lu 6:46,
>
>"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
>ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
>
>
> Luke 18:9-14
> 9. And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
>themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
> 10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and
>the other a publican.
> 11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
>thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
>adulterers, or even as this publican.
> 12. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
> 13. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
>as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be
>merciful to me a sinner.
>14. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than
>the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
>that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
""Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' but not do what I command?" (NAB)
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 23, 2013, 11:29:16 AM5/23/13
to
On May 23, 5:05 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
>
> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
>
> >On May 22, 8:10 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
> >"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
> >ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
>
> > Luke 18:9-14
> > 9. And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
> >themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
> > 10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and
> >the other a publican.
> > 11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
> >thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
> >adulterers, or even as this publican.
> > 12. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
> > 13. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
> >as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be
> >merciful to me a sinner.
> >14. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than
> >the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
> >that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
>
> Lu 6:46,
>
> ""Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' but not do what I command?" (NAB)
>
Notice you didn't humble yourself like the publican, at least
>
> >"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
> >ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
>
> > Luke 18:9-14
> > 9. And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
> >themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
> > 10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and
> >the other a publican.
> > 11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
> >thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
> >adulterers, or even as this publican.
> > 12. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
> > 13. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
> >as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be
> >merciful to me a sinner.
> >14. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than
> >the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
> >that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
>
> Lu 6:46,
>
> ""Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' but not do what I command?" (NAB)
>
use the correct vowels Jomas.
Daniel 5:22
And thou his son, O Belshazzar,
hast not humbled thine heart,
though thou knewest all this;
John 14
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you,
and yet hast thou not known me, Philip?
he that hath seen me hath seen the Father;
and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
Meditate on
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man,
yet He is not two, but one Christ.
http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html
> James
> John 4:23,24www.jw.org
James
May 25, 2013, 8:22:38 AM5/25/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
humble enough to accept the Scriptures that Jesus is not God? (see 1
Cor 11:3, Mr 13:32, John 14:28, etc.
>use the correct vowels Jomas.
I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>On May 23, 5:05 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
>>
>> >On May 22, 8:10 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>>
>> >"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
>> >ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
>>
>> > Luke 18:9-14
>> > 9. And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
>> >themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
>> > 10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and
>> >the other a publican.
>> > 11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
>> >thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
>> >adulterers, or even as this publican.
>> > 12. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
>> > 13. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
>> >as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be
>> >merciful to me a sinner.
>> >14. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than
>> >the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
>> >that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
>>
>> Lu 6:46,
>>
>> ""Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' but not do what I command?" (NAB)
>>
>
> Notice you didn't humble yourself like the publican, at least
That was already done many moons ago, and still is done. Are you
>> "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
>>
>> >On May 22, 8:10 am, James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>>
>> >"The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining
>> >ever brighter till the full light of day." (NIV) "
>>
>> > Luke 18:9-14
>> > 9. And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
>> >themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
>> > 10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and
>> >the other a publican.
>> > 11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank
>> >thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust,
>> >adulterers, or even as this publican.
>> > 12. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
>> > 13. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much
>> >as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be
>> >merciful to me a sinner.
>> >14. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than
>> >the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
>> >that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
>>
>> Lu 6:46,
>>
>> ""Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' but not do what I command?" (NAB)
>>
>
> Notice you didn't humble yourself like the publican, at least
humble enough to accept the Scriptures that Jesus is not God? (see 1
Cor 11:3, Mr 13:32, John 14:28, etc.
>use the correct vowels Jomas.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 25, 2013, 9:51:22 AM5/25/13
to
And Thomas answered and said unto him,
My Lord and my God.
> >use the correct vowels Jomas.
>
> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>
the wrong vowels, you must mean
someone else!
> James
> John 4:23,24www.jw.org
>
> read more »
James
May 26, 2013, 7:09:16 AM5/26/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
It looks like we are in a 'repeating rifle' barrell. I have already
explained Joh 20:28. And I stand by 1 Cor 11:3, Mr 13:32, and Joh
14;28 and others showing Jesus not to be God.
>
>> >use the correct vowels Jomas.
>>
>> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>>
> Then when you address Yahweh using
> the wrong vowels, you must mean
> someone else!
Since in the ORIGINAL (or today closest to the original) writings
there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
act.
>> read more �
explained Joh 20:28. And I stand by 1 Cor 11:3, Mr 13:32, and Joh
14;28 and others showing Jesus not to be God.
>
>> >use the correct vowels Jomas.
>>
>> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>>
> Then when you address Yahweh using
> the wrong vowels, you must mean
> someone else!
there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
act.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 26, 2013, 12:05:09 PM5/26/13
to
Meditate on:
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man,
yet He is not two, but one Christ.
http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html
>
>
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man,
yet He is not two, but one Christ.
http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html
>
>
> >> >use the correct vowels Jomas.
>
> >> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>
> > Then when you address Yahweh using
> > the wrong vowels, you must mean
> > someone else!
>
> Since in the ORIGINAL (or today closest to the original) writings
> there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
> knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
> into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
> pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
> incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
> Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
> from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
> accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
> CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
> act.
>
When your vowels were wrong you complained
>
> >> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>
> > Then when you address Yahweh using
> > the wrong vowels, you must mean
> > someone else!
>
> Since in the ORIGINAL (or today closest to the original) writings
> there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
> knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
> into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
> pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
> incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
> Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
> from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
> accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
> CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
> act.
>
right away, but with God no big deal.
You have been found out,
> James
> John 4:23,24www.jw.org
>
> read more »
James
May 27, 2013, 11:02:42 AM5/27/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
Where in the Bible do you find those words?
If not in the Bible, they are uninspired words of men. I prefer the
inspired word of God. (2 Ti 3:16)
>>
>>
>> >> >use the correct vowels Jomas.
>>
>> >> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>>
>> > � Then when you address Yahweh using
>> > � the wrong vowels, you must mean
>> > � someone else!
>>
>> Since in the ORIGINAL (or today closest to the original) writings
>> there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
>> knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
>> into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
>> pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
>> incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
>> Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
>> from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
>> accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
>> CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
>> act.
>>
> When your vowels were wrong you complained
> right away, but with God no big deal.
> You have been found out,
I wouldn't compare me with God. The most important name in the
universe is found in the Bible around 7000 times. Those who cut it out
will have to answer to their Creator! Has your Bible chopped out God's
name around 7000 times? Then that is around 7000 errors to start with
in your Bible.
>> read more �
If not in the Bible, they are uninspired words of men. I prefer the
inspired word of God. (2 Ti 3:16)
>>
>>
>> >> >use the correct vowels Jomas.
>>
>> >> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>>
>> > � Then when you address Yahweh using
>> > � the wrong vowels, you must mean
>> > � someone else!
>>
>> Since in the ORIGINAL (or today closest to the original) writings
>> there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
>> knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
>> into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
>> pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
>> incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
>> Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
>> from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
>> accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
>> CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
>> act.
>>
> When your vowels were wrong you complained
> right away, but with God no big deal.
> You have been found out,
universe is found in the Bible around 7000 times. Those who cut it out
will have to answer to their Creator! Has your Bible chopped out God's
name around 7000 times? Then that is around 7000 errors to start with
in your Bible.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 27, 2013, 12:43:16 PM5/27/13
to
For there is one God,
and one mediator between God and men,
the man Christ Jesus;
So, both are there
Meditate on:
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man,
yet He is not two, but one Christ.
http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> >> >use the correct vowels Jomas.
>
> >> >> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>
> >> > Then when you address Yahweh using
> >> > the wrong vowels, you must mean
> >> > someone else!
>
> >> Since in the ORIGINAL (or today closest to the original) writings
> >> there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
> >> knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
> >> into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
> >> pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
> >> incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
> >> Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
> >> from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
> >> accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
> >> CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
> >> act.
>
> > When your vowels were wrong you complained
> > right away, but with God no big deal.
> > You have been found out,
>
> I wouldn't compare me with God. The most important name in the
> universe is found in the Bible around 7000 times. Those who cut it out
> will have to answer to their Creator! Has your Bible chopped out God's
> name around 7000 times? Then that is around 7000 errors to start with
> in your Bible.
>
Yet, when I used the wrong vowels for you name
>
> >> >> I am not Jomas, you must be addressing someone else.
>
> >> > Then when you address Yahweh using
> >> > the wrong vowels, you must mean
> >> > someone else!
>
> >> Since in the ORIGINAL (or today closest to the original) writings
> >> there are no vowels in the over 5000 Hebrew manuscripts. Thus NO ONE
> >> knows 100% sure on what those vowels are. Vowel pointing did not come
> >> into play until 500 C.E. or so. And because of the superstition of
> >> pronouncing the divine name, the vowels points for God many be
> >> incorrect. There just is not enough evidence to show how the ancient
> >> Hebrews pronounced God's name. The important thing is to NOT remove it
> >> from the Bibles, but at least let it rest on its Tetragrammaterian
> >> accepted form, YHWH. But most Bibles today go by the superstition and
> >> CUT it out of their Bibles. They will have to face judgement for that
> >> act.
>
> > When your vowels were wrong you complained
> > right away, but with God no big deal.
> > You have been found out,
>
> I wouldn't compare me with God. The most important name in the
> universe is found in the Bible around 7000 times. Those who cut it out
> will have to answer to their Creator! Has your Bible chopped out God's
> name around 7000 times? Then that is around 7000 errors to start with
> in your Bible.
>
you complained, but with God no big deal.
Your pride is such you are unable
to admit when you are wrong.
Proverbs 6:3
Do this now, my son, and deliver thyself,
when thou art come into the hand of thy friend;
go, humble thyself, and make sure thy friend.
>
> read more »
James
May 28, 2013, 8:48:20 AM5/28/13
to
"jwshe...@satx.rr.com" <jwshe...@satx.rr.com>
Notice there is only ONE God, not three. That is in harmony with De
6:4,
""Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God [is] one Jehovah;" (YLT)
>
> So, both are there
>
> Meditate on:
> 33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
> and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
>
> 34. Who, although He is God and man,
> yet He is not two, but one Christ.
>
> http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html
Again, you are going by something uninspired of God. How do you know
that they just didn't make that stuff up for whatever reasons? Since
it contradicts the Bible, it is best to go by the inspired Bible. (2
Ti 3:16)
We know for sure the vowels for my name. To write it different is to
be in error.
However, we don't know for sure the vowels of the divine name. The
transliteration Yahweh many be correct! The important thing, is that
God had it recorded around 7000 times, and did not see fit to give us
exactly the vowels that belong in there. Thus we use what we know and
wait for God to make any corrections later.
The fact still remains, most Bibles (probably yours also) have cut out
the Tetragrammaton and STUCK IN words that are not in the original
document. That is around 7000 errors. Not a good start for any Bible
translation.
Did your Bible cut out God's name in the nearly 7000 times it occurs
in the Bible?
6:4,
""Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God [is] one Jehovah;" (YLT)
>
> So, both are there
>
> Meditate on:
> 33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
> and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
>
> 34. Who, although He is God and man,
> yet He is not two, but one Christ.
>
> http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html
that they just didn't make that stuff up for whatever reasons? Since
it contradicts the Bible, it is best to go by the inspired Bible. (2
Ti 3:16)
be in error.
However, we don't know for sure the vowels of the divine name. The
transliteration Yahweh many be correct! The important thing, is that
God had it recorded around 7000 times, and did not see fit to give us
exactly the vowels that belong in there. Thus we use what we know and
wait for God to make any corrections later.
The fact still remains, most Bibles (probably yours also) have cut out
the Tetragrammaton and STUCK IN words that are not in the original
document. That is around 7000 errors. Not a good start for any Bible
translation.
Did your Bible cut out God's name in the nearly 7000 times it occurs
in the Bible?
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
May 30, 2013, 6:34:55 PM5/30/13
to
God's Names and Their Uses in the Books of Magic Attributed to King
Solomon
Julien Véronèse
Abstract:
A number of medieval texts of learned magic deriving from different
cultural contexts (Latin and Greek Christian, Jewish, Muslim) are
attributed to King Solomon. This article examines frequency of use of
a number of divine names in this corpus, with focus on what names are
used, how they are employed, and how this usage is connected to the
original cultural context of a text.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/mrw/summary/v005/5.1.veronese.html
Solomon
Julien Véronèse
Abstract:
A number of medieval texts of learned magic deriving from different
cultural contexts (Latin and Greek Christian, Jewish, Muslim) are
attributed to King Solomon. This article examines frequency of use of
a number of divine names in this corpus, with focus on what names are
used, how they are employed, and how this usage is connected to the
original cultural context of a text.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/mrw/summary/v005/5.1.veronese.html
0 new messages