Can the Christians accept the Biblical fact that God is one?
Eliyahu
The Bible teaches us that God is one:
"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
"Listen, Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One" Holman Christian
Standard Bible
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." English Standard
Version
"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" New American
Standard Bible
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." New
International Version
"And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one
another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, "Which
commandment is the first of all?"] Jesus answered, "The first is,
`Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, THE LORD IS ONE; and you shall
love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul,
and with all your mind, and with all your strength.'
The second is this, `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There
is no other commandment greater than these." And the scribe said to
him, "You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that HE IS ONE, and
there is no other but he; and to love him with all the heart, and with
all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love one's
neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices." And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to
him, "You are
not far from the kingdom of God."" Mark 12:28-34 Revised Standard
Version
"Now an intermediary implies more than one; but GOD IS ONE." Gal
3:20 Revised Standard Version
"You believe that GOD IS ONE; you do well." James 2:19 Revised
Standard Version
So the Bible teaches clearly that God is ONE.
Can Christians accept that simple fact?
Eliyahu, light unto the nations
"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
"All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we
will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Mica 4:5
This message is sent to you from Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel.
"From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from
Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:3, Mica 4:2
Linda Lee
The scribe was "NOT FAR FROM the kingdom of God", but the scribe still
was not IN the kingdom of God because he didn't accept Yahashua` as
the Messiah, God incarnate as our only Saviour, even though he
understood the real law was one of good works, not the works of the
613 precepts of the Law of Moses.
>
> "Now an intermediary implies more than one; but GOD IS ONE." Gal
> 3:20 Revised Standard Version
>
> "You believe that GOD IS ONE; you do well." James 2:19 Revised
> Standard Version
>
Are you aware that James was not a Jew who taught the Law of Moses; he
was an Israelite apostle who taught the Messiah's gospel and that
believers were to do good works and not the works of the Law of Moses?
He in fact said you were guilty under the Law.
Jas 2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
Jas 2:9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are
convinced of the law as transgressors.
Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in
one point, he is guilty of all.
Jas 2:11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not
kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art
become a transgressor of the law.
Jas 2:12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the
law of liberty.
> So the Bible teaches clearly that God is ONE.
>
> Can Christians accept that simple fact?
Christians (including the apostle James whom you quote) already know
that simple fact. No Christian believes Christianity teaches worship
of three gods, as you pretend they do.
James 4:12 "There is one lawgiver [GOD], who is able to save and to
destroy: who art thou that judgest another?"
So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
>
> Eliyahu, light unto the nations
>
> "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
Already know that, so HOW is it that you are enlightening anyone with
your ignorance of the Messiah's teachings?
joshb
Once the redemption has happened, they will have no choice. I hope future
generations of people born from these gentile idolators will find it
impossible to deny what had happened and to continue to believe in the
jesus idol in any way. It would, hopefully, be absurd to believe in jesus,
the reality would be too overwhelming.
Then again, never underestimate the potential for willful ignorance on the
part of any idolators. I guess that is an important reason why idolatry
does not work, or at least why you can not build a democratic and properly
run nation with idolators. They don't think, they sell out their responsibility
to think; might say that if they don't then their idolatry would be marginal.
I
I do. I do not worship the human Jesus of Nazareth as the One God. Not do I
worship the holy spirit (God's shekinah glory) as a separate god.
Jesus of Nazareth also conmanded christians to worship the One God and not
himself. Jesus quoted the Shema.
--
Jesus answered them, he asked him, 'Of all the commandments, which is the
most important?' Jesus answered: "The first is 'Hear, Israel, the Lord your
God is one Lord, and you are to love the Lord your God with all your heart
and all your soul [and all your mind] and with all your energy.' - Mark
12:28-34 Scholars
Version
This references Deuteronomy 6:4-5 LORD 3068 = Yehovah
proper noun with reference to deity, Jehovah = "the existing One"
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3068&t=KJV
It does NOT reference Jesus of Nazareth.
Linda Lee
wrote:
>
> It does NOT reference Jesus of Nazareth.
So how is it you imagine you're a Christian? Do you think
"Jesus" (funny you still call him that and claim to be a scholar) was
the Christ i.e. Messiah and the Lamb of God? If you don't believe he
was the Christ/Messiah and think "Jesus" was just an ordinary everyday
Jew (like we have today) who preached worship of YHWH, why call
yourself a Christian? Oh, I know, because you're confused...
gs@bigpond
> "Eliyahu" wrote:
> > The Bible teaches us that God is one:
>
> > "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
> > "Listen, Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One" Holman Christian
> > Standard Bible
> > "And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one
> Jesus answered them, he asked him, 'Of all the commandments, which is the
> most important?' Jesus answered: "The first is 'Hear, Israel, the Lord your
> God is one Lord, and you are to love the Lord your God with all your heart
> and all your soul [and all your mind] and with all your energy.' - Mark
> 12:28-34 Scholars Version
> This references Deuteronomy 6:4-5 LORD 3068 = Yehovah
> proper noun with reference to deity, Jehovah = "the existing One"
> http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3068...
> It does NOT reference Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus was born of a virgin, Mary, uniqe of all persons born on this
earth.
Luke 1 : 35 The angel said to Mary, "The Holy Ghost shall come upon
you.....
that holy thing Who shall be born of you shall be called the Son of
God.
John 3 : 16 Jesus said, "For God so loved the world
that He gave His only begotten Son, whosoever believes in Him,
should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Matthew 27 : 46 On the cross Jesus cried with a lour voice,
"My God, my God, Why have You forsaken Me.
At that time He was perfect Man dying for the sins of the world.
(for sinful humns). .
http://creation.com/jesus-christ-questions-and-answers
scroll down to 'Is God really three persons?'
Gladys Swager
I
>> I do not worship the human Jesus of Nazareth as the One God. Not do I
>> worship the holy spirit (God's shekinah glory) as a separate god.
>
> So how is it you imagine you're a Christian?
I am a Christian and have been since 1972.
--
The most pronounced characteristics [of fundamentalists] are the following:
...
(c) an assurance that those who do not share their religious viewpoint are
not really 'true Christians' at all.
- James Barr "Fundamentalism" (SCM Press:1977) p.1
I have changed from YOUR type of fundamentalist Christian to being a Liberal
Christian following the same growth of faith in the One God as outlined
James Fowler's "Stages of Faith".
I am BOTH a Christian AND a Noachide who only worships the One God that
Abraham, Moses and Jesus worshipped.
When Jewish Jesus and his Jewish disciples went to the synagogue and Temple
they DIDN'T worship Jesus as God there.
> Do you think "Jesus" (funny you still call him that and claim to be a
> scholar)
> was the Christ i.e. Messiah and the Lamb of God?
1. I have never claimed to be a "scholar" I am a tertiary trained Christian
philosopher and ex School Principal and Training Manager. i.e. a
professional educator.
2. I believe Jesus is A Christ. There are MANY Christs named in the bible:
- CYRUS (Isaiah 45:1)
- THE PATRIACHS (Psalm 105:15)
- ISRAEL (Habakkuk 3:13, Psalm 28: 8; 84:10)
- JESUS OF NAZARETH (Act 2:36)
Do you believe that ALL these Christs are God??????
3. I do not believe Jesus was a human sacrifice offered to God so that God
could forgive our sins. God does not require human sacrifice.
4. Jesus was my initial gateway to understanding the One God. I follow the
One God whom Jesus followed. I worship the One God whom Jesus worshipped.
> If you don't believe he was the Christ/Messiah
I never stated that. You tend to repeatedly misquote me that is why i
usually have nothing to do with your continual "lasha haron". (Look the term
up.)
> and think "Jesus" was just an ordinary everyday Jew (like we have today)
> who preached > worship of YHWH
Jesus of Nazareth was most definitely only a human Jewish peasant who spoke
about the One god and called JEWS to a better practice of JUDAISM. Jesus'
ministruy WASN'T to Gentiles and he forbad his disciples to gor to the
Gentiles and said to ONLY go to the pople of Israel. Have you not read ALL
your New Testament? Do you wish me to quote the passages of Jesus'
statements in this matter????
> why call yourself a Christian?
Jesus was my initial gateway to understanding the One God. I follow the One
God whom Jesus followed. I worship the One God whom Jesus worshipped.
> Oh, I know, because you're confused...
I am not confused. I have followed what contemporary biblical scholars are
saying worldwide.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amy-Jill Levine "The Misunderstood Jew: The church and the scandal of
the Jewish Jesus" (HarperCollins:2007).
Amy-Jill Levine is a Jewess and E.Rhodes & Leona B Carpenter Professor of
New Testament Studies at Vanderbuilt Divinity School, Nasville, Tennessee.
The Gospel of John with its repeated use of the word "Jew" seemed a litany
of hate. p. 4
... my parents had told me that Jesus was a Jew speaking to other Jews, and
that his basic message was exactly the same as that of Judaism: to "love the
Lord your God" and to "love your neighbour as yourself." p.5
The level of religious illiteracy is staggering. p.10
For Jews, Jesus is unnecessary or a redundancy; he is not needed to save
from sin or death, since Judaism proclaims a deity ready to forgive
repentant sinners ... p. 18
Jesus and his earliest followers were all Jews, they held the Torah and the
Prophets sacred, prayed the Psalms, and celebrated the bravery of Esther and
the fidelity of Ruth. .... Historically, Jesus should be seen as continuous
with the line of Jewish teachers and prophets. ... Jesus cannot be
understood fully unless he is understood through first-century Jewish eyes
and heard through first-century Jewish ears. p.20
Mark 12:28-34 ...Matthew 22:34-40 and Luke 10:25-28 ... This "Great
Commandment", as Matthew terms it, is a combination of Deuteronomy 6:4-5
and Leviticus 19:18. p.19
Mark's version of the citation from Deuteronomy is not a direct quote from
the Hebrew. Deuteronomy speaks of loving God with all "your heart, and with
all yopur soul, and with all your might"; the citation in the Gospel changes
"might" to "mind" and adds as a fourth component "strength". ... Rabbi
Akiva, whom lived a century after Jesus, is said to have stated, "Love your
neighbour as yourself - rthis is the major principle ofb tyhe Torah"
(Jerusalem Talmud Nedarim 9:4) ... other books from early Judaism ...
Testament of dan ("Love the Lord with all your life, and another with a
sincere heart," 5:3) and the Testament of Issachar ("I loved the Lord with
all my strength; likewise, I loved everyman with all my heart," 5:2). ...
Rabbi Hillel ... "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. All the
rest is commentary; go and learn" ... The connection to Hillel's summary of
the teachings of Judaism is reinforced by Jesus's very next comment: "for
this is the Law and the Prophets" (Matt. 7:12). pp 22-23
Jesus dresses like a Jew. Specifically, he wears tzitzit, "fringes." ...it
is these fringes that the woman with the twelve-year hemorrhage touches in
hopes of a healing (Matt. 9:20). Similarly, Mark 6:56 ... pp. 23-24
One of the major debates in the early church was not whether Jews who
followed Jesus needed to keep kosher, but whether Gentiles who followed him
needed to do so as well. The conclusion was that they didn't, for the
commandments given to Moses at Sinai were for the Jewish people, not for the
Gentiles. p.26
Lord's Prayer ... (Matthew 6:9-13) .. In Jewish thought, the designation of
the deity as "Father" develops substantially during the Second temple
period, that is after the return from the Babylonian exile in 538 BCE. ...
Malachi2:10 ... This understanding of God as father continues in synagogues
today, where Jews speak of and to Av ha-rachamim ("Merciful Father") as well
as Avinu malkenu "Our Father, our King") and proclaim, Hu avinu ("He is our
Father). pp. 41-43
The prayer is not "to Jesus"; it says nothing uniquely Christian; and it
fits neatly within Jewish piety. p. 51
The kingdom of heaven is not, for the Jewish Jesus, a piece of real estate
for the single saved soul; it is a communal vision of what could be and what
should be. p. 51
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--
The most pronounced characteristics [of fundamentalists] are the following:
(a) a very strong emphasis on the inerrancy of the Bible, the absence from
it of any sort of error;
(b) a strong hostility to modern theology and to the methods, results and
implications of modern critical study of the Bible;
(c) an assurance that those who do not share their religious viewpoint are
not really 'true Christians' at all.
- James Barr "Fundamentalism" (SCM Press:1977) p.1
I
> Jesus was born of a virgin
A Mistranslation of the OT Hebrew text that it quotes which means "young
maiden of marriageable age - virgin or not"
> John 3 : 16
1. John 3:14-21, in the judgement of the fellows, should not be included
in
quotation marks. The Scholars Version places closing quotation marks at teh
end of v. 13, although some modern translations incorrectly include vv.
14-21 in Jesus' quoted speech. - Funk, Hoover & The Jesus Seminar "The Five
Gospels" (Polebridege:1993) p. 409
2. John's narrative is more fiction than history when compared with the
Synoptics. It is enough to look at his invented lengthy speeches, which are
totally incompatible with the style and content of the preaching of Jesus
preserved in the first three Gospels.
- Geza Vermes "The Authentic Gospel of Jesus" (Penguin:2003) p.371
(Geza Vermes is Professor Emeritus of Jewish Studies at Oxford University)
> Matthew 27 : 46 On the cross Jesus cried with a lour voice,
> "My God, my God, Why have You forsaken Me.
Note that it is NOT "Myself! Myeself! Why have I forsaken myselof?" Jesus
cried out to a God who was not himself.
When Jewish Jesus and his Jewish disciples went to the synagogue and Temple
they DIDN'T worship Jesus as God there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jesus himself is not the proper object of faith.
...
Jesus called on his followers to trust the Father, to believe in God's
domain or reign. The proper object of faith inspired by Jesus is to trust
what Jesus trusted. For that reason, I am not primarily interested in
affirmations about Jesus but in the truths that inspired and informed Jesus.
To call for faith in Jesus is to subsititute the agent for the reality, the
proclaimer for the proclaimed. ...
Jesus pointed to God's domain, something he did not create, something he
did not control. I want to discover what Jesus saw, or heard, or sensed that
was so enchanting, so mezmerizing, so challenging that it held Jesus in its
spell. And I do not want to bhe misled by what his followers did: instead of
looking to see what he saw, his devoted disciples tended to stare at the
pointing finger. Jesus himself should notbe, must not be, the object of
faith. That would be to repeat the idolatry of the first believers.
From Robert W. Funk "Honest To Jesus: Jesus for a New Millenium" (Hodder &
Stoughton: 1996) pp. 304-305
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eliyahu
Bs'd
Because they worship a God the Father, and a god the son.
And one + one = two, and not one.
No matter how often you say 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
Eliyahu, light unto the nations
"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
"All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we
Eliyahu
Bs'd
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I
tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter,
not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the
Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets
aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others
accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever
practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the
kingdom of heaven. Matt 5
Eliyahu
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> > Jesus was born of a virgin
>
> A Mistranslation of the OT Hebrew text that it quotes which means "young
> maiden of marriageable age - virgin or not"
>
seeing that I know not a man (sexually)
> > John 3 : 16
>
> 1. John 3:14-21, in the judgement of the fellows, should not be included
> in quotation marks. The Scholars Version places closing quotation marks at the
> end of v. 13, although some modern translations incorrectly include .
> vs 14-21 in Jesus' quoted speech. - Funk, Hoover & The Jesus Seminar
> "The Five Gospels" (Polebridege:1993) p. 409
>
And the jesus Seminar is authorative???
> 2. John's narrative is more fiction than history when compared with the
> Synoptics. It is enough to look at his invented lengthy speeches, which are
> totally incompatible with the style and content of the preaching of Jesus
> preserved in the first three Gospels.
> - Geza Vermes "The Authentic Gospel of Jesus" (Penguin:2003) p.371
> (Geza Vermes is Professor Emeritus of Jewish Studies at Oxford University)
>
John wrote from a different perspective.
> > Matthew 27 : 46 On the cross Jesus cried with a loud voice,
> > "My God, my God, Why have You forsaken Me.
>
> Note that it is NOT "Myself! Myeself! Why have I forsaken myself?" Jesus
> cried out to a God who was not himself.
>
He was speaking to God His Father - the second person of the Triune
God
speaking to first person of the Triune God.
http://creation.com/god-questions-and-answers
Jesus was aware of His humanity
as he died in the place of sinful humanity.
> When Jewish Jesus and his Jewish disciples went to the synagogue and Temple
> they DIDN'T worship Jesus as God there.
>
Jesus didn't ask for their worship at that time.
His work was to fulfill the role of the Lamb of God
Who takes away sin as John the Baptist declared (John 1 : 29)
>
> Jesus called on his followers to trust the Father, to believe in God's
> domain or reign. The proper object of faith inspired by Jesus is to trust
> what Jesus trusted. For that reason, I am not primarily interested in
> affirmations about Jesus but in the truths that inspired and informed Jesus.
> To call for faith in Jesus is to subsititute the agent for the reality, the
> proclaimer for the proclaimed. ...
>
By grace are we saved through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is
the gift of God.
Ephesians 2 : 8 -
9
Through faith in Whom??
Gladys Swager
I
> Because they worship a God the Father, and a god the son.
> And one + one = two, and not one.
> No matter how often you say 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
This is why, as a Christian I can no longer worship Jesus as God. The
mathematics does not add up.
There is only one God worshipped by Abraham, Moses and Jesus.
When Jewish Jesus and his Jewish disciples went to the synagogue and Temple
they DIDN'T worship Jesus as God there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jesus himself is not the proper object of faith.
...
Jesus called on his followers to trust the Father, to believe in God's
domain or reign. The proper object of faith inspired by Jesus is to trust
what Jesus trusted. For that reason, I am not primarily interested in
affirmations about Jesus but in the truths that inspired and informed Jesus.
To call for faith in Jesus is to subsititute the agent for the reality, the
proclaimer for the proclaimed. ...
Jesus pointed to God's domain, something he did not create, something he
I
>> > Jesus was born of a virgin
>> A Mistranslation of the OT Hebrew text that it quotes which means "young
>> maiden of marriageable age - virgin or not"
>
> Luke 1 : 34 Then mary said to the angel, "How shall this be,
> seeing that I know not a man (sexually)
A fiction written by Luke.
> John wrote from a different perspective.
Major Differences Between John and the Synoptic Gospels
By: W. Hall Harris
...
Major Differences:
1. Omission by John of material found in the synoptics.
John's Gospel omits a large amount of material found in the synoptic
Gospels, including some surprisingly important episodes: the temptation of
Jesus, Jesus' transfiguration, and the institution of the Lord's supper are
not mentioned by John. John mentions no examples of Jesus casting out
demons. The sermon on the mount and the Lord's prayer are not found in the
Fourth Gospel. There are no narrative parables in John's Gospel (most
scholars do not regard John 15:1-8 ["the Vine and the Branches"] as a
parable in the strict sense).
2. Inclusion by John of material not found in the synoptics.
John also includes a considerable amount of material not found in the
synoptics. All the material in John 2-4, Jesus' early Galilean ministry, is
not found in the synoptics. Prior visits of Jesus to Jerusalem before the
passion week are mentioned in John but not found in the synoptics. The
seventh sign-miracle, the resurrection of Lazarus (John 11) is not mentioned
in the synoptics. The extended Farewell Discourse (John 13-17) is not found
in the synoptic Gospels.
3. Different length of Jesus' public ministry.
According to John, Jesus' public ministry extended over a period of at least
three and possibly four years. During this time Jesus goes several times
from Galilee to Jerusalem. The synoptics appear to describe only one journey
of Jesus to Jerusalem (the final one), with most of Jesus' ministry taking
place within one year.
4. 'High' Christology as opposed to the synoptics.
The Prologue to John's Gospel (1:1-18) presents Jesus as the Lovgo" become
flesh (1:14). John begins his Gospel with an affirmation of Jesus'
preexistence and full deity, which climaxes in John 20:28 with Thomas'
confession "My Lord and my God!" The non-predicated ejgw eijmi sayings in
the Fourth Gospel as allusions to Exod 3:14 also point to Jesus' deity (John
8:24, 28, 58). Compare Mark who begins his Gospel with Jesus' baptism and
Matthew and Luke who begin theirs with Jesus' birth. John begins with
eternity past ("In the beginning the Word already was.").
5. Literary Point of View: John versus the synoptics.
The synoptics are written from a third person point of view, describing the
events as if the authors had personally observed all of them and were
reporting what they saw at the time. Thus they are basically descriptive in
their approach. John's Gospel, on the other hand, although also written from
a third person point of view, is more reflective, clearly later than the
events he describes. The author of the Fourth Gospel very carefully
separates himself from the events he describes (cf. the role of the Beloved
Disciple in the Fourth Gospel). However clear it is that he was an
eyewitness of the life of Jesus, it is no less clear that he looks back upon
it from a temporal distance. While we see the events through his eyes, we
are carefully guided to see the events of Jesus' life not as John saw them
when they happened but as he now sees them. We understand more of the
significance of the events described from the position the writer now holds
than an eyewitness could have understood at the time the events took place.
In this sense John's Gospel is much more reflective.
There are numerous passages in John's Gospel which could serve as an example
of this later perspective. Four will serve as examples:
(a) John 2:17-ejmnhvsqhsan oiJ maqhtaiV aujtou' o{ti gegrammevnon ejstivn.
(b) John 2:22-o{te ou hjgevrqh ejk nekrw'n.
(c) John 12:16-tau'ta oujk e[gnwsan aujtou' oiJ maqhtaiV toV prw'ton.
(d) John 20:9-oujdevpw gaVr h[/deisan thVn grafhVn.
In each of these passages it may be easily seen that John has adopted the
"post-resurrection" point of view. He looks back on the events and
emphasizes the inability of the apostles to understand the things that were
happening in their true perspective at the time they occurred. It is only
possible for us to understand these things when we consider the resurrection
of Jesus and its significance in God's plan.
6. Extended dialogues or discourses rather than proverbial sayings.
John presents his material in the form of extended dialogues or discourses
rather than the 'proverbial' or 'pithy' sayings found often in the
synoptics: John 3 (with Nicodemus); John 4 (with the Samaritan woman); John
6 (the Bread of Life Discourse); John 13-17 (the Farewell Discourse with the
disciples). As L. Goppelt observed:
The Gospel of John passed on the words of Jesus predominantly in another
genre than the synoptics; it did not do so in sayings, parables, and
controversy dialogues, but in connected or dialogical discourses.25
7. Use of symbolism and double meaning.
John makes more frequent use of these literary techniques than the
synoptics. Examples: John 2:25 (temple/body); John 7:37-38 (water/Spirit);
John 12:32 (lifted up/exalted).
Much of this symbolism takes the form of dualistic antitheses:
light/darkness (1:4; 3:19; 8:12; 11:9; 12:35, 46); truth/falsehood (8:44);
life/death (5:24; 11:25); above/below (8:23); freedom/slavery (8:33, 36).
Much of this antithetical dualism is also found in the Qumran (Dead Sea
Scrolls) texts. See J. H. Charlesworth, "A Critical Comparison of the
Dualism in 1QS 3:13-4:26 and the 'Dualism' Contained in the Gospel of John",
in John and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York:
Crossroad, 1990).
8. Use of the "misunderstood statement."
John makes frequent use of the "misunderstood statement" as a literary
technique. Jesus says something to someone which is misunderstood, thus
giving Jesus a further opportunity to clarify what he really meant.
Examples: John 3 (Nicodemus' misunderstanding of the new birth as a second
physical birth; John 4 (the Samaritan woman's misunderstanding of the living
water as drinkable water).
9. Ipsissima verba versus ipsissima vox.
The long discourses in John's Gospel do not necessarily represent Jesus'
exact words (ipsissima verba) as long as they give a faithful summary and
interpretive paraphrase (ipsissima vox) of what he actually said. Jesus'
teaching in the Fourth Gospel may be couched in distinctively Johannine
style. On the other hand, some of John's style may have been either directly
or indirectly inspired by Jesus' own manner of speaking: in Mt 11:25-27 + Lk
10:21-22 Jesus uses language almost identical to that which characterizes
his speeches in John's Gospel- "all things have been given to me by my
Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, nor the Father except
the Son and the one to whom the Son wishes to reveal him."
10. "Kingdom of God" versus "eternal life."
The emphasis on the Kingdom of God found in the synoptics is largely missing
in John (the phrase basileiva tou' qeou' occurs only twice in John's Gospel
(3:3, 5) and the noun basileiva only three times (all in 18:36). Instead we
find John's emphasis on 'eternal life' as a present reality (John 5:24
etc.). The emphasis on 'eternal life' in John's Gospel is closer to the
letters of Paul than to the synoptic gospels, as the following chart shows:
11. Realized eschatology in the Gospel of John.
The problem of so-called 'realized' eschatology in the Gospel of John (the
term was popularized by C. H. Dodd) can be seen in microcosm in John
5:20b-30. On the one hand there are statements that speak of the parousia
(second advent) as a future event in the traditional sense: ".for an hour is
coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth,
those who have done good to a resurrection of life, and those who have done
evil to a resurrection of judgment" (John 5:28-29 NASB). Alongside these on
the other hand are statements that seem to speak of the full realization for
believers of salvation in the present (5:20-27): "Truly, truly, I say to you
he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does
not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life" (John 5:24 NASB).
There is an obvious tension between these statements that must be
reconciled; judgment cannot be both present and future at the same time.
Related to John's emphasis on 'eternal life' as a present reality is the
stress on judgment as realized in a person's response to Jesus (John 3:19).
In addition John's Gospel does not emphasize the second advent of Christ as
a future eschatological event (John 14:3 is about the only clear reference).
12. Differences in grammatical style from the synoptic gospels.
The Gospel of John is written in a style of Greek quite different from the
synoptics. The range of vocabulary is smaller. There is frequent parataxis
(use of coordinate clauses rather than subordinate clauses). Asyndeton
frequently occurs. Related to paragraph (7) above, there is little
difference between the words that are ascribed to Jesus and the words of the
Evangelist. Example: try to determine in John 3:1-21 where the words of
Jesus to Nicodemus end and the interpretive comments of the Evangelist
begin.
from
http://bible.org/seriespage/major-differences-between-john-and-synoptic-gospels
Eliyahu
I repeat the question: Can Christians accept the simple fact that God
is one?
Eliyahu, light unto the nations
"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
"All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we
Linda Lee
I guess you're not aware James was an Israelite apostle who taught the
Messiah's gospel and that believers were to do good works and not the
works of the Law of Moses.
That is a lie, "Eliyahu". Christianity is not polytheistic; I think
you're thinking of Hinduism. Christians worship only One GOD who is
the Father of all spirits of all flesh, and is the Holy Spirit who,
when He was incarnate, was called the Son of God.
Son indicates flesh and the Son of God indicates the flesh of God.
>
> And one + one = two, and not one.
>
> No matter how often you say 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
Your equation is wrong. Try 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
You can type your lie again and again and again; you won't convince
any Christians they worship anyone other than the Almighty God.
So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
You are not to judge others. You are not a doer of the Law; you're
just a hearer of the Law.
James 4:12 "There is one lawgiver [GOD], who is able to save and to
destroy: who art thou that judgest another?"
>
> Eliyahu, light unto the nations
So you imagine you're the Messiah, the Christ.
Acts 26:23 "That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the
first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the
people, and to the Gentiles."
>
> "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
>
> "All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we
> will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Mica 4:5
>
> This message is sent to you from Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel.
>
> "From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from
> Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:3, Mica 4:2
That is a prophesy of Yahashua` the Messiah.
And this is a word for you from the Word of God from Jerusalem/Zion:
The Messiah said:
Mat 23:31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the
children of them which killed the prophets.
Mat 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the
damnation of hell?
Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men,
and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of
them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city
to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon
the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of
Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the
altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon
this generation.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and
stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered
thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her
wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Rev 16:14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which
go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather
them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
Rev 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and
keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
Rev 16:16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the
Hebrew tongue ARMAGEDDON.
...
Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, COME OUT OF
HER, MY PEOPLE. THAT YE BE NOT PARTAKERS OF HER SINS, AND THAT YE
RECEIVE NOT OF HER PLAGUES.
...
Rev 18:24 And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints,
and of all that were slain upon the earth.
Linda Lee
Saying he himself would fulfill the law and the prophets, and that
what they say would all be accomplished, is not telling others to
observe and obey every precept of the law of Moses.
Mat 22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question,
tempting him [MESSIAH], and saying,
Mat 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with
all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:40 ***ON THESE TWO COMMANDMENTS HANG _ALL THE LAW_ AND THE
PROPHETS.***
Loving God and loving thy neighbor does not apply to many of the
statutes of the Law of Moses.
Do you forget that you've said the Messiah broke the Sabbath law? The
Messiah said it was acceptable to work on the Sabbath as long as one
did not do any evil.
Exo 31:12 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Exo 31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily
my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you
throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that
doth sanctify you.
Exo 31:14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto
you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for
whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from
among his people.
Exo 31:15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the
sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the
sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
Exo 31:16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to
observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual
covenant.
Exo 31:17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for
ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the
seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
Exo 31:18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of
communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables
of stone, written with the finger of God.
Linda Lee
> On Nov 14, 2:41 pm, "I" wrote:> "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> > > Jesus was born of a virgin
>
> > A Mistranslation of the OT Hebrew text that it quotes which means "young
> > maiden of marriageable age - virgin or not"
>
> Luke 1 : 34 Then mary said to the angel, "How shall this be,
> seeing that I know not a man (sexually)
>
> > > John 3 : 16
>
> > 1. John 3:14-21, in the judgement of the fellows, should not be included
> > in quotation marks. The Scholars Version places closing quotation marks at the
> > end of v. 13, although some modern translations incorrectly include .
> > vs 14-21 in Jesus' quoted speech. - Funk, Hoover & The Jesus Seminar
> > "The Five Gospels" (Polebridege:1993) p. 409
>
> And the jesus Seminar is authorative???
The Jesus Seminar is a bad joke!
No, the Jesus Seminar is not authoritative; it is extremely biased,
and any token believers on it are in it simply for the money and fame
it has generated. The atheists on their panel outnumber the believers,
and when they vote on which NT words are authentic, the minority's
vote is not even mentioned. And they vote as inauthentic (and of a
"later tradition") anything a modern Jew would not have said, as if
the Messiah was a modern-day Jew who would have had no criticism of
any of the Pharisees and Sadducees. The Jesus Seminar is a bad joke!
This is what they've decided a Jew would not and could not have said
in John 3:14-21:
Joh 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even
so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten
Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life.
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the
world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that
believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in
the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the
world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds
were evil.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither
cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Joh 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds
may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
The Messiah is referring to this incident of Moses 'raising up the
serpent' (no doubt the Jesus Seminar's majority didn't even know what
he was talking about):
Num 21:5 And the people spake against God, and against Moses,
Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness?
for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul
loatheth this light bread.
Num 21:6 And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they
bit the people; and much people of Israel died.
Num 21:7 Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have
sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray
unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses
prayed for the people.
Num 21:8 And the ***LORD said unto MOSES, MAKE THEE A FIERY SERPENT,
AND SET IT UPON A POLE: AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS, THAT EVERY ONE THAT
IS BITTEN, WHEN HE LOOKETH UPON IT, SHALL LIVE.***
Num 21:9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole,
and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he
beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.
The Messiah on the cross was likened to the serpent (serpent
representing flesh) of God who gave life to those whom God had
condemned to death for their sin against God if they looked to it.
>
> > 2. John's narrative is more fiction than history when compared with the
> > Synoptics. It is enough to look at his invented lengthy speeches, which are
> > totally incompatible with the style and content of the preaching of Jesus
> > preserved in the first three Gospels.
> > - Geza Vermes "The Authentic Gospel of Jesus" (Penguin:2003) p.371
> > (Geza Vermes is Professor Emeritus of Jewish Studies at Oxford University)
>
> John wrote from a different perspective.
>
> > > Matthew 27 : 46 On the cross Jesus cried with a loud voice,
> > > "My God, my God, Why have You forsaken Me.
>
> > Note that it is NOT "Myself! Myeself! Why have I forsaken myself?" Jesus
> > cried out to a God who was not himself.
>
> He was speaking to God His Father - the second person of the Triune
> God
> speaking to first person of the Triune God.http://creation.com/god-questions-and-answers
Eliyahu
> > > So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
>
> > Bs'd
>
> > Because they worship a God the Father, and a god the son.
>
> That is a lie, "Eliyahu". Christianity is not polytheistic; I think
> you're thinking of Hinduism. Christians worship only One GOD who is
> the Father of all spirits of all flesh, and is the Holy Spirit who,
> when He was incarnate, was called the Son of God.
Bs'd
So you are worshiping a "God the Father" and a "god the son".
So what are you whining that it is a lie when I say so?
> > And one + one = two, and not one.
>
> > No matter how often you say 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
>
> Your equation is wrong. Try 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
>
> You can type your lie again and again and again; you won't convince
> any Christians they worship anyone other than the Almighty God.
If only they only worshiped the one and only God Y-H-W-H who is one.
But they worship a whole divine family.
And then they come up with ridiculous lies like "1 + 1 + 1 = 1", or
idiocy like "1 x 1 x 1 = 1".
So you think that 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
Well, we all make mistakes in life. Happens to the best of us. Not
everybody is comfortable with higher mathematics.
But I'll explain this to you.
When you have three pieces of fruit, which are all apples, than you
have 1 apple + 1 apple + 1apple = 3 apples.
Then you do not have 1 apple x 1 apple x 1 apple = 1 apple, but then
you really have THREE apples.
Evenso with gods.
When you have three persons who are all divine, then you have 1 god +
1 god + 1 god = 3 gods.
Then you do not have 1 god x 1 god x 1 god = 1 god, but then you
really have THREE gods.
Got it?
> So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
Because they worship three gods, and then say they only worship one.
But talking is cheap. Everyone can say the most stupid things like
the Xians do, but a four year old child knows better.
Eliyahu, light unto the nations
Zev
news:
0bfcb3ed-1723-41ae...@fj16g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 13, 11:40 pm, Eliyahu <silvermountz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 13, 8:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
>> > On Nov 13, 12:40 pm, Eliyahu <silvermountz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Loving God and loving thy neighbor does not apply to many of the
> statutes of the Law of Moses.
>
> Do you forget that you've said the Messiah broke the Sabbath law? The
> Messiah said it was acceptable to work on the Sabbath as long as one
> did not do any evil.
You say that Jesus was sinless.
But he defines what's permitted and what's prohibited.
I asked you about this recently.
Maybe you missed it.
Linda Lee
You're a lying pig; I do not worship two gods nor three gods. You are
just ignorant and don't recognize your own God already came as the
Saviour.
>
> > > And one + one = two, and not one.
>
> > > No matter how often you say 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
>
> > Your equation is wrong. Try 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
>
> > You can type your lie again and again and again; you won't convince
> > any Christians they worship anyone other than the Almighty God.
>
> If only they only worshiped the one and only God Y-H-W-H who is one.
> But they worship a whole divine family.
>
> And then they come up with ridiculous lies like "1 + 1 + 1 = 1", or
> idiocy like "1 x 1 x 1 = 1".
It was you who came up with the 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 lie.
>
> So you think that 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
>
> Well, we all make mistakes in life. Happens to the best of us. Not
> everybody is comfortable with higher mathematics.
> But I'll explain this to you.
>
> When you have three pieces of fruit, which are all apples, than you
> have 1 apple + 1 apple + 1apple = 3 apples.
>
> Then you do not have 1 apple x 1 apple x 1 apple = 1 apple, but then
> you really have THREE apples.
So you claim that 1 x 1 x 1 = 3? ROFLOL! Try again. 1 x 1 = 1 x 1 =
1.
>
> Evenso with gods.
>
> When you have three persons who are all divine, then you have 1 god +
> 1 god + 1 god = 3 gods.
>
> Then you do not have 1 god x 1 god x 1 god = 1 god, but then you
> really have THREE gods.
>
> Got it?
I get that you're ignorant of your own Scriptures, just like your
fathers were in the main, which the OT reports God often complained
about, and the NT has the Messiah repeating the same complaint.
>
> > So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
>
> Because they worship three gods,
That is a lie.
You are not to judge others. You are not a doer of the Law; you're
just a hearer of the Law, and you take it upon yourself to judge
others with false judgments.
James 4:12 "There is one lawgiver [GOD], who is able to save and to
destroy: who art thou that judgest another?"
> and then say they only worship one.
That's because they do. Either you are really dense or you just like
to level false accusations at Gentiles.
You are dishonest; you don't want to admit that often the Angel
of the LORD refers to God himself because that would be a slippery
slope to admitting the Holy Spirit is God, which you condemn as
idolatry.
Was Jacob/Israel being an IDOLATER when he called the God of his
fathers "The Angel"?
Jacob/Israel calls God "The Angel" in Gen. 48:15-16.
Gen 48:14-16, "And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it
upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon
Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the
firstborn. And he blessed Joseph, and said, ***God, before whom my
fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life
long unto this day, The Angel which redeemed me from all evil,***
bless the lads; and let my name be named on them".
Was GOD HIMSELF encouraging IDOLATRY when GOD told David he would be
David's FATHER?
2Sa 7:8 Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus
saith the LORD of hosts
...
2Sa 7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son
It was the Angel of the LORD/God who appeared to Moses in the burning
bush.
Exo 3:2 And ** the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of
fire out of the midst of a bush:** and he looked, and, behold, the
bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
Exo 3:3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great
sight, why the bush is not burnt.
Exo 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, **God
called unto him out of the midst of the bush,** and said, Moses,
Moses. And he said, Here am I.
And it was the Angel of the LORD/GOD who appeared to Abraham to
prevent the sacrifice of Isaac:
Gen 22:10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to
slay his son.
Gen 22:11 And ***the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven,
and said, Abraham, Abraham:*** and he said, Here am I. And **he [the
angel of the LORD] said,** Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do
thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing
thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
And it was still the Angel of the LORD/GOD who was speaking to Abraham
here:
Gen 22:15 And ***the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of
heaven*** the second time,
Gen 22:16 And said, ***By MYSELF have I sworn, saith the LORD,*** for
because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son,
thine only son:
Gen 22:17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I
will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven...
Isa 63:10 "But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he
was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them".
>
> But talking is cheap. Everyone can say the most stupid things like
Stupid things like you do. According to your IGNORANT definition of
IDOLATRY, Moses engaged in and encouraged idolatry by writing that the
LORD God told David he would be his *father,* and writing the LORD God
was the Angel of the Lord (an Angel being a Spirit).
> the Xians do, but a four year old child knows better.
>
> Eliyahu, light unto the nations
You are not the Messiah; the Messiah was prophesied to be a light to
the nations. You are not enlightening anyone.
>
> "From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from
> Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:3, Mica 4:2
Those are prophesies of Yahashua` the Messiah.
Linda Lee
> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> news:
> 0bfcb3ed-1723-41ae-8b88-2ffa1aea7...@fj16g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Nov 13, 11:40 pm, Eliyahu <silvermountz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Nov 13, 8:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
> >> > On Nov 13, 12:40 pm, Eliyahu <silvermountz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Loving God and loving thy neighbor does not apply to many of the
> > statutes of the Law of Moses.
>
> > Do you forget that you've said the Messiah broke the Sabbath law? The
> > Messiah said it was acceptable to work on the Sabbath as long as one
> > did not do any evil.
>
> You say that Jesus was sinless.
> But he defines what's permitted and what's prohibited.
>
> I asked you about this recently.
> Maybe you missed it.
He was sinless. He was Lord even of the Sabbath day.
Zev
f118a0...@v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
In that case, you define Jesus as a non-sinner,
and make the concept meaningless.
Linda Lee
> "Linda Lee" <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> f118a00c3...@v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
What concept? The suffering servant of Isaiah 53 was not bruised for
his own iniquities, but for the iniquities of others.
Hosea
Bs'd
So he could transgress the laws because he was "master of the laws"??
And then the Xians say: "He never sinned"???
Linda Lee
He defined the "law" as loving God and loving one's neighbor. He
professed belief in him led to good works, not to all the works of the
law.
Mat 22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question,
tempting him, and saying,
Mat 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with
all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the
prophets.
Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments
is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
Mar 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,
and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy
strength: this is the first commandment.
Mar 12:31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than
these.
Mar 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said
the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
Mar 12:33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the
understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and
to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt
offerings and sacrifices.
Mar 12:34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said
unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after
that durst ask him any question.
Mar 12:35 And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple,
How say the scribes that Christ is the Son of David?
Mar 12:36 For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to
my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy
footstool.
Mar 12:37 David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he
then his son? And the common people heard him gladly.
You don't even observe all the works of the law, so don't be a
hypocrite; you may not be able to sacrifice in the temple anymore, but
Jews could still stone people to death in obedience to the punishing
aspects of the law of Moses, so why don't you if you're supposedly so
"obedient" to the whole Law of Moses?
Here are the 613 Mitzvoh (commandments) of the Law of Moses as
enumerated by Maimonides. So tell us how many YOU OBEY? It would be a
much shorter list than the ones you DON'T OBEY, I am certain.
The following are the 613 commandments and their source in scripture,
as enumerated by Maimonides - from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Mitzvot#Maimonides:
Maimonides' list
1. To know there is a God Ex. 20:2
2. Not to even think that there are other gods besides Him
Standard->Ex. 20:3 Yemenite->Ex. 20:2
3. To know that He is One Deut. 6:4
4. To love Him Deut. 6:5
5. To fear Him Deut. 10:20
6. To sanctify His Name Lev. 22:32
7. Not to profane His Name Lev. 22:32
8. Not to destroy objects associated with His Name Deut. 12:4
9. To listen to the prophet speaking in His Name Deut. 18:15
10. Not to try the LORD unduly Deut. 6:16
11. To emulate His ways Deut. 28:9
12. To cleave to those who know Him Deut. 10:20
13. To love other Jews Lev. 19:18
14. To love converts Deut. 10:19
15. Not to hate fellow Jews Lev. 19:17
16. To reprove a sinner Lev. 19:17
17. Not to embarrass others Lev. 19:17
18. Not to oppress the weak Ex. 22:21
19. Not to speak derogatorily of others Lev. 19:16
20. Not to take revenge Lev. 19:18
21. Not to bear a grudge Lev. 19:18
22. To learn Torah Deut. 6:7
23. To honor those who teach and know Torah Lev. 19:32
24. Not to inquire into idolatry Lev. 19:4
25. Not to follow the whims of your heart or what your eyes see
Num. 15:39
26. Not to blaspheme Ex. 22:27
27. Not to worship idols in the manner they are worshiped Standard-
>Ex. 20:6 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:5
28. Not to worship idols in the four ways we worship God Standard-
>Ex. 20:6 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:5
29. Not to make an idol for yourself Standard->Ex. 20:5 TLT Yemenite-
>Ex. 20:4
30. Not to make an idol for others Lev. 19:4
31. Not to make human forms even for decorative purposes Standard-
>Ex. 20:21 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:20
32. Not to turn a city to idolatry Deut. 13:14
33. To burn a city that has turned to idol worship Deut. 13:17
34. Not to rebuild it as a city Deut. 13:17
35. Not to derive benefit from it Deut. 13:18
36. Not to missionize an individual to idol worship Deut. 13:12
37. Not to love the idolater Deut. 13:9
38. Not to cease hating the idolater Deut. 13:9
39. Not to save the idolater Deut. 13:9
40. Not to say anything in the idolater's defense Deut. 13:9
41. Not to refrain from incriminating the idolater Deut. 13:9
42. Not to prophesize in the name of idolatry Deut. 13:14
43. Not to listen to a false prophet Deut. 13:4
44. Not to prophesize falsely in the name of God Deut. 18:20
45. Not to be afraid of killing the false prophet Deut. 18:22
46. Not to swear in the name of an idol Ex. 23:13
47. Not to perform ov (medium) Lev. 19:31
48. Not to perform yidoni ("magical seer") Lev. 19:31
49. Not to pass your children through the fire to Molech Lev. 18:21
50. Not to erect a pillar in a public place of worship Deut. 16:22
51. Not to bow down before a smooth stone Lev. 26:1
52. Not to plant a tree in the Temple courtyard Deut. 16:21
53. To destroy idols and their accessories Deut. 12:2
54. Not to derive benefit from idols and their accessories Deut.
7:26
55. Not to derive benefit from ornaments of idols Deut. 7:25
56. Not to make a covenant with idolaters Deut. 7:2
57. Not to show favor to them Deut. 7:2
58. Not to let them dwell in the Land of Israel Ex. 23:33
59. Not to imitate them in customs and clothing Lev. 20:23
60. Not to be superstitious Lev. 19:26
61. Not to go into a trance to foresee events, etc. Deut. 18:10
62. Not to engage in astrology Lev. 19:26
63. Not to mutter incantations Deut. 18:11
64. Not to attempt to contact the dead Deut. 18:11
65. Not to consult the ov Deut. 18:11
66. Not to consult the yidoni Deut. 18:11
67. Not to perform acts of magic Deut. 18:10
68. Men must not shave the hair off the sides of their head Lev.
19:27
69. Men must not shave their beards with a razor Lev. 19:27
70. Men must not wear women's clothing Deut. 22:5
71. Women must not wear men's clothing Deut. 22:5
72. Not to tattoo the skin Lev. 19:28
73. Not to tear the skin in mourning Deut. 14:1
74. Not to make a bald spot in mourning Deut. 14:1
75. To repent and confess wrongdoings Num. 5:7
76. To say the Shema twice daily Deut. 6:7
77. To serve the Almighty with prayer Ex. 23:25
78. The Kohanim must bless the Jewish nation daily Num. 6:23
79. To wear tefillin (phylacteries) on the head Deut. 6:8
80. To bind tefillin on the arm Deut. 6:8
81. To put a mezuzah on each door post Deut. 6:9
82. Each male must write a Torah scroll Deut. 31:19
83. The king must have a separate Sefer Torah for himself Deut.
17:18
84. To have tzitzit on four-cornered garments Num. 15:38
85. To bless the Almighty after eating Deut. 8:10
86. To circumcise all males on the eighth day after their birth
Gen. 17:10
87. To rest on the seventh day Ex. 23:12
88. Not to do prohibited labor on the seventh day Standard->Ex.
20:11 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:10
89. The court must not inflict punishment on Shabbat Ex. 35:3
90. Not to walk outside the city boundary on Shabbat Ex. 16:29
91. To sanctify the day with Kiddush and Havdalah Standard->Ex. 20:9
TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:8
92. To rest from prohibited labor on Yom Kippur Lev. 23:32
93. Not to do prohibited labor on Yom Kippur Lev. 23:32
94. To afflict yourself on Yom Kippur Lev. 16:29
95. Not to eat or drink on Yom Kippur Lev. 23:29
96. To rest on the first day of Passover Lev. 23:7
97. Not to do prohibited labor on the first day of Passover Lev.
23:8
98. To rest on the seventh day of Passover Lev. 23:8
99. Not to do prohibited labor on the seventh day of Passover Lev.
23:8
100. To rest on Shavuot Lev. 23:21
101. Not to do prohibited labor on Shavuot Lev. 23:21
102. To rest on Rosh Hashanah Lev. 23:24
103. Not to do prohibited labor on Rosh Hashanah Lev. 23:25
104. To rest on Sukkot Lev. 23:35
105. Not to do prohibited labor on Sukkot Lev. 23:35
106. To rest on Shemini Atzeret Lev. 23:36
107. Not to do prohibited labor on Shemini Atzeret Lev. 23:36
108. Not to eat chametz on the afternoon of the 14th day of Nissan
Deut. 16:3
109. To destroy all chametz on 14th day of Nissan Ex. 12:15
110. Not to eat chametz all seven days of Passover Ex. 13:3
111. Not to eat mixtures containing chametz all seven days of
Passover Ex. 12:20
112. Not to see chametz in your domain seven days Ex. 13:7
113. Not to find chametz in your domain seven days Ex. 12:19
114. To eat matzah on the first night of Passover Ex. 12:18
115. To relate the Exodus from Egypt on that night Ex. 13:8
116. To hear the Shofar on the first day of Tishrei (Rosh Hashanah)
Num. 9:1
117. To dwell in a Sukkah for the seven days of Sukkot Lev. 23:42
118. To take up a Lulav and Etrog all seven days Lev. 23:40
119. Each man must give a half shekel annually Ex. 30:13
120. Courts must calculate to determine when a new month begins Ex.
12:2
121. To afflict oneself and cry out before God in times of calamity
Num. 10:9
122. To marry a wife by means of ketubah and kiddushin Deut. 22:13
123. Not to have sexual relations with women not thus married Deut.
23:18
124. Not to withhold food, clothing, and sexual relations from your
wife Ex. 21:10
125. To have children with one's wife Gen. 1:28
126. To issue a divorce by means of a Get document Deut. 24:1
127. A man must not remarry his ex-wife after she has married someone
else Deut. 24:4
128. To perform yibbum (marry the widow of one's childless brother)
Deut. 25:5
129. To perform halizah (free the widow of one's childless brother
from yibbum) Deut. 25:9
130. The widow must not remarry until the ties with her brother-in-
law are removed (by halizah) Deut. 25:5
131. The court must fine one who sexually seduces a maiden Ex.
22:15-16
132. The rapist must marry the maiden Deut. 22:29
133. He is never allowed to divorce her Deut. 22:29
134. The slanderer must remain married to his wife Deut. 22:19
135. He must not divorce her Deut. 22:19
136. To fulfill the laws of the Sotah Num. 5:30
137. Not to put oil on her meal offering (as usual) Num. 5:15
138. Not to put frankincense on her meal offering (as usual) Num.
5:15
139. Not to have sexual relations with your mother Lev. 18:7
140. Not to have sexual relations with your father's wife Lev. 18:8
141. Not to have sexual relations with your sister Lev. 18:9
142. Not to have sexual relations with your father's wife's daughter
Lev. 18:11
143. Not to have sexual relations with your son's daughter Lev.
18:10
144. Not to have sexual relations with your daughter Lev. 18:10
145. Not to have sexual relations with your daughter's daughter Lev.
18:10
146. Not to have sexual relations with a woman and her daughter Lev.
18:17
147. Not to have sexual relations with a woman and her son's daughter
Lev. 18:17
148. Not to have sexual relations with a woman and her daughter's
daughter Lev. 18:17
149. Not to have sexual relations with your father's sister Lev.
18:12
150. Not to have sexual relations with your mother's sister Lev.
18:13
151. Not to have sexual relations with your father's brother's wife
Lev. 18:14
152. Not to have sexual relations with your son's wife Lev. 18:15
153. Not to have sexual relations with your brother's wife Lev.
18:16
154. Not to have sexual relations with your wife's sister Lev. 18:18
155. A man must not have sexual relations with an animal Lev. 18:23
156. A woman must not have sexual relations with an animal Lev.
18:23
157. A man must not have sexual relations with a man Lev. 18:22
158. Not to have sexual relations with your father Lev. 18:7
159. Not to have sexual relations with your father's brother Lev.
18:14
160. Not to have sexual relations with someone else's wife Lev.
18:20
161. Not to have sexual relations with a menstrually impure woman
Lev. 18:19
162. Not to marry non-Jews Deut. 7:3
163. Not to let Moabite and Ammonite males marry into the Jewish
people Deut. 23:4
164. Not to prevent a third-generation Egyptian convert from marrying
into the Jewish people Deut. 23:8-9
165. Not to refrain from marrying a third generation Edomite convert
Deut. 23:8-9
166. Not to let a mamzer (a child born due to an illegal
relationship) marry into the Jewish people Deut. 23:3
167. Not to let a eunuch marry into the Jewish people Deut. 23:2
168. Not to offer to God any castrated male animals Lev. 22:24
169. The High Priest must not marry a widow Lev. 21:14
170. The High Priest must not have sexual relations with a widow even
outside of marriage Lev. 21:15
171. The High Priest must marry a virgin maiden Lev. 21:13
172. A Kohen (priest) must not marry a divorcee Lev. 21:7
173. A Kohen must not marry a zonah (a woman who has had a forbidden
sexual relationship) Lev. 21:7
174. A Kohen must not marry a chalalah ("a desecrated person") (party
to or product of 169-172) Lev. 21:7
175. Not to make pleasurable (sexual) contact with any forbidden
woman Lev. 18:6
176. To examine the signs of animals to distinguish between kosher
and non-kosher Lev. 11:2
177. To examine the signs of fowl to distinguish between kosher and
non-kosher Deut. 14:11
178. To examine the signs of fish to distinguish between kosher and
non-kosher Lev. 11:9
179. To examine the signs of locusts to distinguish between kosher
and non-kosher Lev. 11:21
180. Not to eat non-kosher animals Lev. 11:4
181. Not to eat non-kosher fowl Lev. 11:13
182. Not to eat non-kosher fish Lev. 11:11
183. Not to eat non-kosher flying insects Deut. 14:19
184. Not to eat non-kosher creatures that crawl on land Lev. 11:41
185. Not to eat non-kosher maggots Lev. 11:44
186. Not to eat worms found in fruit on the ground Lev. 11:42
187. Not to eat creatures that live in water other than (kosher) fish
Lev. 11:43
188. Not to eat the meat of an animal that died without ritual
slaughter Deut. 14:21
189. Not to benefit from an ox condemned to be stoned Ex. 21:28
190. Not to eat meat of an animal that was mortally wounded Ex.
22:30
191. Not to eat a limb torn off a living creature Deut. 12:23
192. Not to eat blood Lev. 3:17
193. Not to eat certain fats of clean animals Lev. 3:17
194. Not to eat the sinew of the thigh Gen. 32:33
195. Not to eat mixtures of milk and meat cooked together Ex. 23:19
196. Not to cook meat and milk together Ex. 34:26
197. Not to eat bread from new grain before the Omer Lev. 23:14
198. Not to eat parched grains from new grain before the Omer Lev.
23:14
199. Not to eat ripened grains from new grain before the Omer Lev.
23:14
200. Not to eat fruit of a tree during its first three years Lev.
19:23
201. Not to eat diverse seeds planted in a vineyard Deut. 22:9
202. Not to eat untithed fruits Lev. 22:15
203. Not to drink wine poured in service to idols Deut. 32:38
204. To ritually slaughter an animal before eating it Deut. 12:21
205. Not to slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day
Lev. 22:28
206. To cover the blood (of a slaughtered beast or fowl) with earth
Lev. 17:13
207. To send away the mother bird before taking its children Deut.
22:6
208. To release the mother bird if she was taken from the nest Deut.
22:7
209. Not to swear falsely in God's Name Lev. 19:12
210. Not to take God's Name in vain Standard->Ex. 20:7 TLT Yemenite-
>Ex. 20:6
211. Not to deny possession of something entrusted to you Lev. 19:11
212. Not to swear in denial of a monetary claim Lev. 19:11
213. To swear in God's Name to confirm the truth when deemed
necessary by court Deut. 10:20
214. To fulfill what was uttered and to do what was avowed Deut.
23:24
215. Not to break oaths or vows Num. 30:3
216. For oaths and vows annulled, there are the laws of annulling
vows explicit in the Torah Num. 30:3
217. The Nazir must let his hair grow Num. 6:5
218. He must not cut his hair Num. 6:5
219. He must not drink wine, wine mixtures, or wine vinegar Num. 6:3
220. He must not eat fresh grapes Num. 6:3
221. He must not eat raisins Num. 6:3
222. He must not eat grape seeds Num. 6:4
223. He must not eat grape skins Num. 6:4
224. He must not be under the same roof as a corpse Num. 6:6
225. He must not come into contact with the dead Num. 6:7
226. He must shave his head after bringing sacrifices upon completion
of his Nazirite period Num. 6:9
227. To estimate the value of people as determined by the Torah Lev.
27:2
228. To estimate the value of consecrated animals Lev. 27:12-13
229. To estimate the value of consecrated houses Lev. 27:14
230. To estimate the value of consecrated fields Lev. 27:16
231. Carry out the laws of interdicting possessions (cherem) Lev.
27:28
232. Not to sell the cherem Lev. 27:28
233. Not to redeem the cherem Lev. 27:28
234. Not to plant diverse seeds together Lev. 19:19
235. Not to plant grains or greens in a vineyard Deut. 22:9
236. Not to crossbreed animals Lev. 19:19
237. Not to work different animals together Deut. 22:10
238. Not to wear shaatnez, a cloth woven of wool and linen Deut.
22:11
239. To leave a corner of the field uncut for the poor Lev. 19:10
240. Not to reap that corner Lev. 19:9
241. To leave gleanings Lev. 19:9
242. Not to gather the gleanings Lev. 19:9
243. To leave the gleanings of a vineyard Lev. 19:10
244. Not to gather the gleanings of a vineyard Lev. 19:10
245. To leave the unformed clusters of grapes Lev. 19:10
246. Not to pick the unformed clusters of grapes Lev. 19:10
247. To leave the forgotten sheaves in the field Deut. 24:19
248. Not to retrieve them Deut. 24:19
249. To separate the "tithe for the poor" Deut. 14:28
250. To give charity Deut. 15:8
251. Not to withhold charity from the poor Deut. 15:7
252. To set aside Terumah Gedolah (gift for the Kohen) Deut. 18:4
253. The Levite must set aside a tenth of his tithe Num. 18:26
254. Not to preface one tithe to the next, but separate them in their
proper order Ex. 22:28
255. A non-Kohen must not eat Terumah[clarification needed] Lev.
22:10
256. A hired worker or a Jewish bondsman of a Kohen must not eat
Terumah Lev. 22:10
257. An uncircumcised Kohen must not eat Terumah Ex. 12:48
258. An impure Kohen must not eat Terumah Lev. 22:4
259. A chalalah (party to #s 169-172 above) must not eat Terumah
Lev. 22:12
260. To set aside Ma'aser (tithe) each planting year and give it to a
Levite Num. 18:24
261. To set aside the second tithe (Ma'aser Sheni) Deut. 14:22
262. Not to spend its redemption money on anything but food, drink,
or ointment Deut. 26:14
263. Not to eat Ma'aser Sheni while impure Deut. 26:14
264. A mourner on the first day after death must not eat Ma'aser
Sheni Deut. 26:14
265. Not to eat Ma'aser Sheni grains outside Jerusalem Deut. 12:17
266. Not to eat Ma'aser Sheni wine products outside Jerusalem Deut.
12:17
267. Not to eat Ma'aser Sheni oil outside Jerusalem Deut. 12:17
268. The fourth year crops must be totally for holy purposes like
Ma'aser Sheni Lev. 19:24
269. To read the confession of tithes every fourth and seventh year
Deut. 26:13
270. To set aside the first fruits and bring them to the Temple Ex.
23:19
271. The Kohanim must not eat the first fruits outside Jerusalem
Deut. 12:17
272. To read the Torah portion pertaining to their presentation
Deut. 26:5
273. To set aside a portion of dough for a Kohen Num. 15:20
274. To give the foreleg, two cheeks, and abomasum of slaughtered
animals to a Kohen Deut. 18:3
275. To give the first shearing of sheep to a Kohen Deut. 18:4
276. To redeem firstborn sons and give the money to a Kohen Num.
18:15
277. To redeem the firstborn donkey by giving a lamb to a Kohen Ex.
13:13
278. To break the neck of the donkey if the owner does not intend to
redeem it Ex. 13:13
279. To rest the land during the seventh year by not doing any work
which enhances growth Ex. 34:21
280. Not to work the land during the seventh year Lev. 25:4
281. Not to work with trees to produce fruit during that year Lev.
25:4
282. Not to reap crops that grow wild that year in the normal manner
Lev. 25:5
283. Not to gather grapes which grow wild that year in the normal way
Lev. 25:5
284. To leave free all produce which grew in that year Ex. 23:11
285. To release all loans during the seventh year Deut. 15:2
286. Not to pressure or claim from the borrower Deut. 15:2
287. Not to refrain from lending immediately before the release of
the loans for fear of monetary loss Deut. 15:9
288. The Sanhedrin must count seven groups of seven years Lev. 25:8
289. The Sanhedrin must sanctify the fiftieth year Lev. 25:10
290. To blow the Shofar on the tenth of Tishrei to free the slaves
Lev. 25:9
291. Not to work the soil during the fiftieth year (Jubilee)Lev.
25:11
292. Not to reap in the normal manner that which grows wild in the
fiftieth year Lev. 25:11
293. Not to pick grapes which grew wild in the normal manner in the
fiftieth year Lev. 25:11
294. Carry out the laws of sold family properties Lev. 25:24
295. Not to sell the land in Israel indefinitely Lev. 25:23
296. Carry out the laws of houses in walled cities Lev. 25:29
297. The Tribe of Levi must not be given a portion of the land in
Israel, rather they are given cities to dwell in Deut. 18:1
298. The Levites must not take a share in the spoils of war Deut.
18:1
299. To give the Levites cities to inhabit and their surrounding
fields Num. 35:2
300. Not to sell the fields but they shall remain the Levites' before
and after the Jubilee year Lev. 25:34
301. To build a Temple Ex. 25:8
302. Not to build the altar with stones hewn by metal Standard->Ex.
20:24 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:23
303. Not to climb steps to the altar Standard->Ex. 20:27 TLT Yemenite-
>Ex. 20:26
304. To show reverence to the Temple Lev. 19:30
305. To guard the Temple area Num. 18:2
306. Not to leave the Temple unguarded Num. 18:5
307. To prepare the anointing oil Ex. 30:31
308. Not to reproduce the anointing oil Ex. 30:32
309. Not to anoint with anointing oil Ex. 30:32
310. Not to reproduce the incense formula Ex. 30:37
311. Not to burn anything on the Golden Altar besides incense Ex.
30:9
312. The Levites must transport the ark on their shoulders Num. 7:9
313. Not to remove the staves from the ark Ex. 25:15
314. The Levites must work in the Temple Num. 18:23
315. No Levite must do another's work of either a Kohen or a Levite
Num. 18:3
316. To dedicate the Kohen for service Lev. 21:8
317. The work of the Kohanim's shifts must be equal during holidays
Deut. 18:6-8
318. The Kohanim must wear their priestly garments during service
Ex. 28:2
319. Not to tear the priestly garments Ex. 28:32
320. The Kohen Gadol 's breastplate must not be loosened from the
Efod Ex. 28:28
321. A Kohen must not enter the Temple intoxicated Lev. 10:9
322. A Kohen must not enter the Temple with his head uncovered Lev.
10:6
323. A Kohen must not enter the Temple with torn clothes Lev. 10:6
324. A Kohen must not enter the Temple indiscriminately Lev. 16:2
325. A Kohen must not leave the Temple during service Lev. 10:7
326. To send the impure from the Temple Num. 5:2
327. Impure people must not enter the Temple Num. 5:3
328. Impure people must not enter the Temple Mount area Deut. 23:11
329. Impure Kohanim must not do service in the temple Lev. 22:2
330. An impure Kohen, following immersion, must wait until after
sundown before returning to service Lev. 22:7
331. A Kohen must wash his hands and feet before service Ex. 30:19
332. A Kohen with a physical blemish must not enter the sanctuary or
approach the altar Lev. 21:23
333. A Kohen with a physical blemish must not serve Lev. 21:17
334. A Kohen with a temporary blemish must not serve Lev. 21:17
335. One who is not a Kohen must not serve Num. 18:4
336. To offer only unblemished animals Lev. 22:21
337. Not to dedicate a blemished animal for the altar Lev. 22:20
338. Not to slaughter it Lev. 22:22
339. Not to sprinkle its blood Lev. 22:24
340. Not to burn its fat Lev. 22:22
341. Not to offer a temporarily blemished animal Deut. 17:1
342. Not to sacrifice blemished animals even if offered by non-Jews
Lev. 22:25
343. Not to inflict wounds upon dedicated animals Lev. 22:21
344. To redeem dedicated animals which have become disqualified
Deut. 12:15
345. To offer only animals which are at least eight days old Lev.
22:27
346. Not to offer animals bought with the wages of a harlot or the
animal exchanged for a dog Deut. 23:19
347. Not to burn honey or yeast on the altar Lev. 2:11
348. To salt all sacrifices Lev. 2:13
349. Not to omit the salt from sacrifices Lev. 2:13
350. Carry out the procedure of the burnt offering as prescribed in
the Torah Lev. 1:3
351. Not to eat its meat Deut. 12:17
352. Carry out the procedure of the sin offering Lev. 6:18
353. Not to eat the meat of the inner sin offering Lev. 6:23
354. Not to decapitate a fowl brought as a sin offering Lev. 5:8
355. Carry out the procedure of the guilt offering Lev. 7:1
356. The Kohanim must eat the sacrificial meat in the Temple Ex.
29:33
357. The Kohanim must not eat the meat outside the Temple courtyard
Deut. 12:17
358. A non-Kohen must not eat sacrificial meat Ex. 29:33
359. To follow the procedure of the peace offering Lev. 7:11
360. Not to eat the meat of minor sacrifices before sprinkling the
blood Deut. 12:17
361. To bring meal offerings as prescribed in the Torah Lev. 2:1
362. Not to put oil on the meal offerings of wrongdoers Lev. 5:11
363. Not to put frankincense on the meal offerings of wrongdoers
Lev. 3:11
364. Not to eat the meal offering of the High Priest Lev. 6:16
365. Not to bake a meal offering as leavened bread Lev. 6:10
366. The Kohanim must eat the remains of the meal offerings Lev. 6:9
367. To bring all avowed and freewill offerings to the Temple on the
first subsequent festival Deut. 12:5-6
368. Not to withhold payment incurred by any vow Deut. 23:22
369. To offer all sacrifices in the Temple Deut. 12:11
370. To bring all sacrifices from outside Israel to the Temple Deut.
12:26
371. Not to slaughter sacrifices outside the courtyard Lev. 17:4
372. Not to offer any sacrifices outside the courtyard Deut. 12:13
373. To offer two lambs every day Num. 28:3
374. To light a fire on the altar every day Lev. 6:6
375. Not to extinguish this fire Lev. 6:6
376. To remove the ashes from the altar every day Lev. 6:3
377. To burn incense every day Ex. 30:7
378. To light the Menorah every day Ex. 27:21
379. The Kohen Gadol ("High Priest") must bring a meal offering every
day Lev. 6:13
380. To bring two additional lambs as burnt offerings on Shabbat
Num. 28:9
381. To make the show bread Ex. 25:30
382. To bring additional offerings on Rosh Chodesh (" The New Month")
Num. 28:11
383. To bring additional offerings on Passover Num. 28:19
384. To offer the wave offering from the meal of the new wheat Lev.
23:10
385. Each man must count the Omer - seven weeks from the day the new
wheat offering was brought Lev. 23:15
386. To bring additional offerings on Shavuot Num. 28:26
387. To bring two leaves to accompany the above sacrifice Lev. 23:17
388. To bring additional offerings on Rosh Hashana Num. 29:2
389. To bring additional offerings on Yom Kippur Num. 29:8
390. To bring additional offerings on Sukkot Num. 29:13
391. To bring additional offerings on Shmini Atzeret Num. 29:35
392. Not to eat sacrifices which have become unfit or blemished
Deut. 14:3
393. Not to eat from sacrifices offered with improper intentions
Lev. 7:18
394. Not to leave sacrifices past the time allowed for eating them
Lev. 22:30
395. Not to eat from that which was left over Lev. 19:8
396. Not to eat from sacrifices which became impure Lev. 7:19
397. An impure person must not eat from sacrifices Lev. 7:20
398. To burn the leftover sacrifices Lev. 7:17
399. To burn all impure sacrifices Lev. 7:19
400. To follow the procedure of Yom Kippur in the sequence prescribed
in Parshah Acharei Mot ("After the death of Aaron's sons...") Lev.
16:3
401. One who profaned property must repay what he profaned plus a
fifth and bring a sacrifice Lev. 5:16
402. Not to work consecrated animals Deut. 15:19
403. Not to shear the fleece of consecrated animals Deut. 15:19
404. To slaughter the paschal sacrifice at the specified time Ex.
12:6
405. Not to slaughter it while in possession of leaven Ex. 23:18
406. Not to leave the fat overnight Ex. 23:18
407. To slaughter the second Paschal Lamb Num. 9:11
408. To eat the Paschal Lamb with matzah and Marror on the night of
the fourteenth of Nissan Ex. 12:8
409. To eat the second Paschal Lamb on the night of the 15th of Iyar
Num. 9:11
410. Not to eat the paschal meat raw or boiled Ex. 12:9
411. Not to take the paschal meat from the confines of the group Ex.
12:46
412. An apostate must not eat from it Ex. 12:43
413. A permanent or temporary hired worker must not eat from it Ex.
12:45
414. An uncircumcised male must not eat from it Ex. 12:48
415. Not to break any bones from the paschal offering Ex. 12:46
416. Not to break any bones from the second paschal offering Num.
9:12
417. Not to leave any meat from the paschal offering over until
morning Ex. 12:10
418. Not to leave the second paschal meat over until morning Num.
9:12
419. Not to leave the meat of the holiday offering of the 14th until
the 16th Deut. 16:4
420. To be seen at the Temple on Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot Deut.
16:16
421. To celebrate on these three Festivals (bring a peace offering)
Ex. 23:14
422. To rejoice on these three Festivals (bring a peace offering)
Deut. 16:14
423. Not to appear at the Temple without offerings Deut. 16:16
424. Not to refrain from rejoicing with, and giving gifts to, the
Levites Deut. 12:19
425. To assemble all the people on the Sukkot following the seventh
year Deut. 31:12
426. To set aside the firstborn animals Ex. 13:12
427. The Kohanim must not eat unblemished firstborn animals outside
Jerusalem Deut. 12:17
428. Not to redeem the firstborn Num. 18:17
429. Separate the tithe from animals Lev. 27:32
430. Not to redeem the tithe Lev. 27:33
431. Every person must bring a sin offering (in the temple) for his
transgression Lev. 4:27
432. Bring an asham talui (temple offering) when uncertain of guilt
Lev. 5:17-18
433. Bring an asham vadai (temple offering) when guilt is ascertained
Lev. 5:25
434. Bring an oleh v'yored (temple offering) offering (if the person
is wealthy, an animal; if poor, a bird or meal offering) Lev. 5:7-11
435. The Sanhedrin must bring an offering (in the Temple) when it
rules in error Lev. 4:13
436. A woman who had a running (vaginal) issue must bring an offering
(in the Temple) after she goes to the Mikveh Lev. 15:28-29
437. A woman who gave birth must bring an offering (in the Temple)
after she goes to the Mikveh Lev. 12:6
438. A man who had a running (unnatural urinary) issue must bring an
offering (in the Temple) after he goes to the Mikveh Lev. 15:13-14
439. A metzora must bring an offering (in the Temple) after going to
the Mikveh Lev. 14:10
440. Not to substitute another beast for one set apart for sacrifice
Lev. 27:10
441. The new animal, in addition to the substituted one, retains
consecration Lev. 27:10
442. Not to change consecrated animals from one type of offering to
another Lev. 27:26
443. Carry out the laws of impurity of the dead Num. 19:14
444. Carry out the procedure of the Red Heifer (Para Aduma) Num.
19:2
445. Carry out the laws of the sprinkling water Num. 19:21
446. Rule the laws of human tzara'at as prescribed in the Torah Lev.
13:12
447. The metzora must not remove his signs of impurity Deut. 24:8
448. The metzora must not shave signs of impurity in his hair Lev.
13:33
449. The metzora must publicize his condition by tearing his
garments, allowing his hair to grow and covering his lips Lev. 13:45
450. Carry out the prescribed rules for purifying the metzora Lev.
14:2
451. The metzora must shave off all his hair prior to purification
Lev. 14:9
452. Carry out the laws of tzara'at of clothing Lev. 13:47
453. Carry out the laws of tzara'at of houses Lev. 13:34
454. Observe the laws of menstrual impurity Lev. 15:19
455. Observe the laws of impurity caused by childbirth Lev. 12:2
456. Observe the laws of impurity caused by a woman's running issue
Lev. 15:25
457. Observe the laws of impurity caused by a man's running issue
(irregular ejaculation of infected semen) Lev. 15:3
458. Observe the laws of impurity caused by a dead beast Lev. 11:39
459. Observe the laws of impurity caused by the eight shratzim
(insects) Lev. 11:29
460. Observe the laws of impurity of a seminal emission (regular
ejaculation, with normal semen) Lev. 15:16
461. Observe the laws of impurity concerning liquid and solid foods
Lev. 11:34
462. Every impure person must immerse himself in a Mikvah to become
pure Lev. 15:16
463. The court must judge the damages incurred by a goring ox Ex.
21:28
464. The court must judge the damages incurred by an animal eating
Ex. 22:4
465. The court must judge the damages incurred by a pit Ex. 21:33
466. The court must judge the damages incurred by fire Ex. 22:5
467. Not to steal money stealthily Lev. 19:11
468. The court must implement punitive measures against the thief
Ex. 21:37
469. Each individual must ensure that his scales and weights are
accurate Lev. 19:36
470. Not to commit injustice with scales and weights Lev. 19:35
471. Not to possess inaccurate scales and weights even if they are
not for use Deut. 25:13
472. Not to move a boundary marker to steal someone's property Deut.
19:14
473. Not to kidnap Standard->Ex. 20:14 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:13
474. Not to rob openly Lev. 19:13
475. Not to withhold wages or fail to repay a debt Lev. 19:13
476. Not to covet and scheme to acquire another's possession Standard-
>Ex. 20:15 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:14
477. Not to desire another's possession Standard->Deut. 5:19
Yemenite->Deut. 5:18
478. Return the robbed object or its value Lev. 5:23
479. Not to ignore a lost object Deut. 22:3
480. Return the lost object Deut. 22:1
481. The court must implement laws against the one who assaults
another or damages another's property Ex. 21:18
482. Not to murder Standard->Ex. 20:13 TLT Yemenite->Ex. 20:12
483. Not to accept monetary restitution to atone for the murderer
Num. 35:31
484. The court must send the accidental murderer to a city of refuge
Num. 35:25
485. Not to accept monetary restitution instead of being sent to a
city of refuge Num. 35:32
486. Not to kill the murderer before he stands trial Num. 35:12
487. Save someone being pursued even by taking the life of the
pursuer Deut. 25:12
488. Not to pity the pursuer Num. 35:12
489. Not to stand idly by if someone's life is in danger Lev. 19:16
490. Designate cities of refuge and prepare routes of access Deut.
19:3
491. Break the neck of a calf by the river valley following an
unsolved murder Deut. 21:4
492. Not to work nor plant that river valley Deut. 21:4
493. Not to allow pitfalls and obstacles to remain on your property
Deut. 22:8
494. Make a guard rail around flat roofs Deut. 22:8
495. Not to put a stumbling block before a blind man (nor give
harmful advice) Lev. 19:14
496. Help another remove the load from a beast which can no longer
carry it Ex. 23:5
497. Help others load their beast Deut. 22:4
498. Not to leave others distraught with their burdens (but to help
either load or unload) Deut. 22:4
499. Conduct sales according to Torah law Lev. 25:14
500. Not to overcharge or underpay for an article Lev. 25:14
501. Not to insult or harm anybody with words Lev. 25:17
502. Not to cheat a convert monetarily Ex. 22:20
503. Not to insult or harm a convert with words Ex. 22:20
504. Purchase a Hebrew slave in accordance with the prescribed laws
Ex. 21:2
505. Not to sell him as a slave is sold Lev. 25:42
506. Not to work him oppressively Lev. 25:43
507. Not to allow a non-Jew to work him oppressively Lev. 25:53
508. Not to have him do menial slave labor Lev. 25:39
509. Give him gifts when he goes free Deut. 15:14
510. Not to send him away empty-handed Deut. 15:13
511. Redeem Jewish maidservants Ex. 21:8
512. Betroth the Jewish maidservant Ex. 21:8
513. The master must not sell his maidservant Ex. 21:8
514. Canaanite slaves must work forever unless injured in one of
their limbs Lev. 25:46
515. Not to extradite a slave who fled to (Biblical) Israel Deut.
23:16
516. Not to wrong a slave who has come to Israel for refuge Deut.
23:16
517. The courts must carry out the laws of a hired worker and hired
guard Ex. 22:9
518. Pay wages on the day they were earned Deut. 24:15
519. Not to delay payment of wages past the agreed time Lev. 19:13
520. The hired worker may eat from the unharvested crops where he
works Deut. 23:25
521. The worker must not eat while on hired time Deut. 23:26
522. The worker must not take more than he can eat Deut. 23:25
523. Not to muzzle an ox while plowing Deut. 25:4
524. The courts must carry out the laws of a borrower Ex. 22:13
525. The courts must carry out the laws of an unpaid guard Ex. 22:6
526. Lend to the poor and destitute Ex. 22:24
527. Not to press them for payment if you know they don't have it
Ex. 22:24
528. Press the idolater for payment Deut. 15:3
529. The creditor must not forcibly take collateral Deut. 24:10
530. Return the collateral to the debtor when needed Deut. 24:13
531. Not to delay its return when needed Deut. 24:12
532. Not to demand collateral from a widow Deut. 24:17
533. Not to demand as collateral utensils needed for preparing food
Deut. 24:6
534. Not to lend with interest Lev. 25:37
535. Not to borrow with interest Deut. 23:20
536. Not to intermediate in an interest loan, guarantee, witness, or
write the promissory note Ex. 22:24
537. Lend to and borrow from idolaters with interest Deut. 23:21
538. The courts must carry out the laws of the plaintiff, admitter,
or denier Ex. 22:8
539. Carry out the laws of the order of inheritance Num. 27:8
540. Appoint judges Deut. 16:18
541. Not to appoint judges who are not familiar with judicial
procedure Deut. 1:17
542. Decide by majority in case of disagreement Ex. 23:2
543. The court must not execute through a majority of one; at least a
majority of two is required Ex. 23:2
544. A judge who presented an acquittal plea must not present an
argument for conviction in capital cases Deut. 23:2
545. The courts must carry out the death penalty of stoning Deut.
22:24
546. The courts must carry out the death penalty of burning Lev.
20:14
547. The courts must carry out the death penalty of the sword Ex.
21:20
548. The courts must carry out the death penalty of strangulation
Lev. 20:10
549. The courts must hang those stoned for blasphemy or idolatry
Deut. 21:22
550. Bury the executed on the day they are killed Deut. 21:23
551. Not to delay burial overnight Deut. 21:23
552. The court must not let the sorcerer live Ex. 22:17
553. The court must give lashes to the wrongdoer Deut. 25:2
554. The court must not exceed the prescribed number of lashes Deut.
25:3
555. The court must not kill anybody on circumstantial evidence Ex.
23:7
556. The court must not punish anybody who was forced to do a crime
Deut. 22:26
557. A judge must not pity the murderer or assaulter at the trial
Deut. 19:13
558. A judge must not have mercy on the poor man at the trial Lev.
19:15
559. A judge must not respect the great man at the trial Lev. 19:15
560. A judge must not decide unjustly the case of the habitual
transgressor Ex. 23:6
561. A judge must not pervert justice Lev. 19:15
562. A judge must not pervert a case involving a convert or orphan
Deut. 24:17
563. Judge righteously Lev. 19:15
564. The judge must not fear a violent man in judgment Deut. 1:17
565. Judges must not accept bribes Ex. 23:8
566. Judges must not accept testimony unless both parties are present
Ex. 23:1
567. Not to curse judges Ex. 22:27
568. Not to curse the head of state or leader of the Sanhedrin Ex.
22:27
569. Not to curse any upstanding Jew Lev. 19:14
570. Anybody who knows evidence must testify in court Lev. 5:1
571. Carefully interrogate the witness Deut. 13:15
572. A witness must not serve as a judge in capital crimes Deut.
19:17
573. Not to accept testimony from a lone witness Deut. 19:15
574. Transgressors must not testify Ex. 23:1
575. Relatives of the litigants must not testify Deut. 24:16
576. Not to testify falsely Standard->Ex. 20:14 TLT Yemenite->Ex.
20:13
577. Punish the false witnesses as they tried to punish the defendant
Deut. 19:19
578. Act according to the ruling of the Sanhedrin Deut. 17:11
579. Not to deviate from the word of the Sanhedrin Deut. 17:11
580. Not to add to the Torah commandments or their oral explanations
Deut. 13:1
581. Not to diminish from the Torah any commandments, in whole or in
part Deut. 13:1
582. Not to curse your father and mother Ex. 21:17
583. Not to strike your father and mother Ex. 21:15
584. Respect your father or mother Standard->Ex. 20:13 TLT Yemenite-
>Ex. 20:12
585. Fear your father or mother Lev. 19:3
586. Not to be a rebellious son Deut. 21:18
587. Mourn for relatives Lev. 10:19
588. The High Priest must not defile himself for any relative Lev.
21:11
589. The High Priest must not enter under the same roof as a corpse
Lev. 21:11
590. A Kohen must not defile himself (by going to funerals or
cemeteries) for anyone except relatives Lev. 21:1
591. Appoint a king from Israel Deut. 17:15
592. Not to appoint a foreigner Deut. 17:15
593. The king must not have too many wives Deut. 17:17
594. The king must not have too many horses Deut. 17:16
595. The king must not have too much silver and gold Deut. 17:17
596. Destroy the seven Canaanite nations Deut. 20:17
597. Not to let any of them remain alive Deut. 20:16
598. Wipe out the descendants of Amalek Deut. 25:19
599. Remember what Amalek did to the Jewish people Deut. 25:17
600. Not to forget Amalek's atrocities and ambush on our journey from
Egypt in the desert Deut. 25:19
601. Not to dwell permanently in Egypt Deut. 17:16
602. Offer peace terms to the inhabitants of a city while holding
siege, and treat them according to the Torah if they accept the terms
Deut. 20:10
603. Not to offer peace to Ammon and Moab while besieging them Deut.
23:7
604. Not to destroy fruit trees even during the siege Deut. 20:19
605. Prepare latrines outside the camps Deut. 23:13
606. Prepare a shovel for each soldier to dig with Deut. 23:14
607. Appoint a priest to speak with the soldiers during the war
Deut. 20:2
608. He who has taken a wife, built a new home, or planted a vineyard
is given a year to rejoice with his possessions Deut. 24:5
609. Not to demand from the above any involvement, communal or
military Deut. 24:5
610. Not to panic and retreat during battle Deut. 20:3
611. Keep the laws of the captive woman Deut. 21:11
612. Not to sell her into slavery Deut. 21:14
613. Not to retain her for servitude after having sexual relations
with her Deut. 21:14
Sam Taylor
So then Jesus is the Lawgiver that broke his own Law?
G-D has no Flesh but Jesus?
I Thought G-D was a Spirit, and DIDN'T take upon Him
the Nature of Angels .....BUT BECAME FLESH.
If He Became Flesh He is then Flesh Today
Therefore You G-D is Flesh.
and Jesus IS the Flesh of G-D.
He should mumble that to His other Personalities.
Sam Taylor
"Eliyahu" <silverm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5954f5a-8144-4b2b...@v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
Bs'd
Evenso with gods.
Got it?
Could it be Square? the Sqaure of 1 IS 1
Could it be the sqaure root the Sqaure Root of 1 is 1
Maybe it's the new math, and I am too old to
understand it?
if I count them on My fingers I still get 3,
and if i keep checking My answere , My Fingers get Tired.
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> >> > Jesus was born of a virgin
> >> A Mistranslation of the OT Hebrew text that it quotes which means "young
> >> maiden of marriageable age - virgin or not"
>
> > Luke 1 : 34 Then mary said to the angel, "How shall this be,
> > seeing that I know not a man (sexually)
>
> A fiction written by Luke.
>
it that she was not a virgin.
And Luke was a doctor. Why would he want to write fiction???
> > John wrote from a different perspective.
<snip see posting 13 above>
A different persepctive does not mean a contrary perspective.
You have it in for the those you term 'Fundamentalistists'.
But they were writing long before the modern-day trendies.
The New Testament is a Fundamentalist text.
Is Jesus Christ the Creator God?
http://creation.com/is-jesus-christ-the-creator-god
Romans 6 : 23 The wages of sin is death.
The gift of God is eternal life through jesus Chrsit our Lord.
As Jesus rose from the dead - was resurrected - on the third day,
death could not hold him as He had committed no sin.
1 Peter 2 : 22 - 24 (Jesus Chrsit) did no sin, neither was guile
found
in His mouth; Who, when He was reviled, reviled not agian;
when He suffered, He threatened not; but committed Himself
to him Who judges righteously.
Who His own self bare our sins in His own body on the tree,
that we, being dead to sin, should live unto righteousness;
by whose stripes we are healed.
Jesus Christ - perfect God and perfect man.
'There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin;
He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in'.
By faith (alone) Not works lest anyone should boast.
It is then that works built on Jesus Christ, the foundation,
count for a reward. 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15
Gladys Swager
I
>> > John wrote from a different perspective.
...
> A different persepctive does not mean a contrary perspective.
Oh, but John's gospel CONTRADICTS the synoptic gospels in MANY places.
... and you are completely wrong that a human can ever be the One God
Yahweh. Here is the main proof that Jesus of Nazareth is NOT the One God
Yahweh.
##################################################
JESUS' GREATEST COMMANDMENT
Jesus answered them, he asked him, 'Of all the commandments, which is the
most important?' Jesus answered: "The first is 'Hear, Israel, the Lord your
God *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] is one Lord, and you are to love the Lord your
God *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] with all your heart and all your soul [and all
your mind] and with all your energy.' - Mark 12:29-31 ScholarsVersion
He replied to him, "'You are to love the Lord your God *[NOT JESUS OF
NAZARETH] with all your heart and with all your soul and all your mind.'
This commandment is first and foremost. - Matthew 22:37-38 Scholars Version
The quote for Jesus' greatest commandment references Deuteronomy 6:4-5
#############################################################
4 'Listen, Israel: Yahweh *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] our God is the one, the
only Yahweh.
5 You must love Yahweh *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] your God with all your
heart, with all your soul, with all your strength.
- Deuteronomy 6:4-5 from The New Jersulaem Bible
########################################################
Yahweh = LORD 3068 = Yehovah proper noun with reference to deity, Jehovah =
"the existing One"
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3068&t=KJV
It does NOT reference Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus is NOT mentioned in Deuteronomy 6:4-5.
Jesus is NOT mentioned in Mark 12:29-31 or Matthew 22:37-38.
FURTHERMORE ............
################################################
1 Then God spoke all these words. He said,
2 'I am Yahweh *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] your God who brought you out of
Egypt, where you lived as slaves.
3 'You shall have no other gods *[SUCH AS JESUS OF NAZARETH] to rival me.
4 'You shall not make yourself a carved image or any likeness of anything in
heaven above or on earth beneath or in the waters under the earth.
5 'You shall not bow down to them or serve them *[INCLUDING JESUS OF
NAZARETH]. For I, Yahweh *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] your God, am a jealous God
and I punish a parent's fault in the children, the grandchildren, and the
great-grandchildren among those who hate me;
6 but I act with faithful love towards thousands of those who love me and
keep my commandments.
Exodus 20:1-6 The New Jersulaem Bible
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
6 ' "I am Yahweh *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] your God who brought you out of
Egypt, out of the place of slave-labour.
7 ' "You will have no gods *[SUCH AS JESUS OF NAZARETH] other than me.
8 ' "You must not make yourselves any image or any likeness of anything in
heaven above or on earth beneath or in the waters under the earth;
9 you must not bow down to these gods *[SUCH AS JESUS OF NAZARETH] or serve
them. For I, Yahweh *[NOT JESUS OF NAZARETH] your God, am a jealous God and
I punish the parents' fault in the children, the grandchildren and the
great-grandchildren, among those who hate me;
10 but I show faithful love to thousands, to those who love me and keep my
commandments.
Deuteronomy 5:6-7 The New Jersulaem Bible
#############################################
The historic time / space Jesus of Nazareth did NOT bring the people of
Israel "out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage" - ONLY Yahweh
did that (Father God)
THEREFORE
Jesus is NOT the infinite One God Yahweh and "You will have no gods
[INCLUDING JESUS OF NAZARETH] other than me (the infinite One God Yahweh)".
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote:
Is Jesus Christ God?
www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/christ.htm
>
God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself
2 Corinth. 5 : 19
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
(and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten
of the Father, full of grace and truth John 1 : 14
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth
came by Jesus Christ John 1 : 17
Jesus Christ is the only person who has been resurrected.
Death could not hold Him for He is the perfect, Son of God,
and was God in human flesh.
"You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God" Matthew 16 : 16.
Luke 1 : 35,
The angel said, The Holy Ghost shall come upon you, (Mary)
and the holy thing that is born of you shall be called the Son of
God."
Gladys Swager
I
> Is Jesus Christ God?
No. Jesus is the Christ anointed BY God. i.e.The Christ OF God.
There are many Christs mentioned in the Bible:
1. CYRUS (Isaiah 45:1)
2. THE PATRIACHS (Psalm 105:15)
3. ISRAEL (Habakkuk 3:13, Psalm 28: 8; 84:10)
4. JESUS OF NAZARETH (Act 2:36)
IF "Messiah" means "God" then why aren't Cyrus, the Patriachs and Israel
considered to be the One God (Yahweh) alongside Jesus of Nazareth???????
The ANOINTER (the One God / Yahweh) is far greater than the ANOINTED (Jesus
of Nazareth).
Hosea
> It was you who came up with the 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 lie.
Bs'd
So now you think that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 is a lie??
>
>
>
> > So you think that 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
>
> > Well, we all make mistakes in life. Happens to the best of us. Not
> > everybody is comfortable with higher mathematics.
> > But I'll explain this to you.
>
> > When you have three pieces of fruit, which are all apples, than you
> > have 1 apple + 1 apple + 1apple = 3 apples.
>
> > Then you do not have 1 apple x 1 apple x 1 apple = 1 apple, but then
> > you really have THREE apples.
>
> So you claim that 1 x 1 x 1 = 3? ROFLOL! Try again. 1 x 1 = 1 x 1 =
> 1.
I think your intelligence is to low to have a meaningful discussion.
If you can't count to three, than the Almighty will probably hold you
unaccountable.
> > Evenso with gods.
>
> > When you have three persons who are all divine, then you have 1 god +
> > 1 god + 1 god = 3 gods.
>
> > Then you do not have 1 god x 1 god x 1 god = 1 god, but then you
> > really have THREE gods.
>
> > Got it?
>
> I get that you're ignorant of your own Scriptures, just like your
> fathers were in the main, which the OT reports God often complained
> about, and the NT has the Messiah repeating the same complaint.
But can you now at least understand that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, and not 1?
> > > So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
>
> > Because they worship three gods,
>
> That is a lie.
I repeat: 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, and not 1.
> You are dishonest; you don't want to admit that often the Angel
> of the LORD refers to God himself
Only Y-H-W-H is called Y-H-W-H.
Don't believe in idiocy like God being his own angel/messenger.
> Jacob/Israel calls God "The Angel" in Gen. 48:15-16.
>
> Gen 48:14-16, "And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it
> upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon
> Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the
> firstborn. And he blessed Joseph, and said, ***God, before whom my
> fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life
> long unto this day, The Angel which redeemed me from all evil,***
> bless the lads; and let my name be named on them".
Try to relax, take three deep breaths, and then read the above text
again, and see that Jacob switches from God to the angel. They are
not the same.
> Was GOD HIMSELF encouraging IDOLATRY when GOD told David he would be
> David's FATHER?
No.
> 2Sa 7:8 Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus
> saith the LORD of hosts
> ...
> 2Sa 7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son
>
> It was the Angel of the LORD/God who appeared to Moses in the burning
> bush.
>
> Exo 3:2 And ** the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of
> fire out of the midst of a bush:** and he looked, and, behold, the
> bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
> Exo 3:3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great
> sight, why the bush is not burnt.
> Exo 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, **God
> called unto him out of the midst of the bush,** and said, Moses,
> Moses. And he said, Here am I.
So either God spoke THROUGH the angel, or, like a Jewish commentator
says, Moses got a prophetic vision which increased, first there was an
angel in the bush, later God himself was in the bush.
But no matter how you want to read it, God is not his own messenger/
angel. (the Hebrew word for "angel" means "messenger")
> And it was the Angel of the LORD/GOD who appeared to Abraham to
> prevent the sacrifice of Isaac:
>
> Gen 22:10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to
> slay his son.
> Gen 22:11 And ***the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven,
> and said, Abraham, Abraham:*** and he said, Here am I. And **he [the
> angel of the LORD] said,** Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do
> thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing
> thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
>
> And it was still the Angel of the LORD/GOD who was speaking to Abraham
> here:
>
> Gen 22:15 And ***the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of
> heaven*** the second time,
> Gen 22:16 And said, ***By MYSELF have I sworn, saith the LORD,*** for
> because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son,
> thine only son:
> Gen 22:17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I
> will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven...
How much more clear can it be that the angel is a mouthpiece for God?
> Isa 63:10 "But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he
> was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them".
>
>
>
> > But talking is cheap. Everyone can say the most stupid things like
>
> Stupid things like you do. According to your IGNORANT definition of
> IDOLATRY, Moses engaged in and encouraged idolatry by writing that the
> LORD God told David he would be his *father,* and writing the LORD God
> was the Angel of the Lord (an Angel being a Spirit).
You really have no idea what you are talking about....
Idol worship is when you worship somebody or something else then the
one and only God Y-H-W-H who is one.
And where does MOSES say that God told to David that He would be his
Father?
And an angel is not a spirit, but a messanger. The Hebrew word
translated as "angel" means just "messenger".
> > the Xians do, but a four year old child knows better.
>
> > Eliyahu, light unto the nations
>
> You are not the Messiah; the Messiah was prophesied to be a light to
> the nations. You are not enlightening anyone.
You think you see the messiah in all kinds of verses where no messiah
is te be seen at all.
Try to look trough your brainwashing.
The strongest proof for the servant being the people of Israel is
Isaiah 42. This is also claimed by the NT as a messianic prophecy, see
Matthew 12:16-21; "And charged them that they should not make him
known: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the
prophet, saying, Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in
whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he
shall shew judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not strive, nor cry;
neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed
shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send
forth judgment unto victory. And in his name shall the Gentiles
trust."
This is a quote from Isaiah 42, applied by the NT to JC. Now read here
the whole chapter of Isaiah 42 and see that it speaks all the time
about the servant of God, see who is that servant of God, and see that
it does not speak about the messiah:
"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul
delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth
judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his
voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break,
and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth
judgment unto truth. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he
have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched
them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of
it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them
that walk therein: I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and
will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant
of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; To open the blind eyes, to
bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness
out of the prison house. I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory
will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I
declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them. Sing unto the
LORD a new song, and his praise from the end of the earth, ye that go
down to the sea, and all that is therein; the isles, and the
inhabitants thereof. Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up
their voice, the villages that Kedar doth inhabit: let the inhabitants
of the rock sing, let them shout from the top of the mountains. Let
them give glory unto the LORD, and declare his praise in the islands.
The LORD shall go forth as a mighty man, he shall stir up jealousy
like a man of war: he shall cry, yea, roar; he shall prevail against
his enemies. I have long time holden my peace; I have been still, and
refrained myself: now will I cry like a travailing woman; I will
destroy and devour at once. I will make waste mountains and hills, and
dry up all their herbs; and I will make the rivers islands, and I will
dry up the pools. And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew
not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make
darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things
will I do unto them, and not forsake them. They shall be turned back,
they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say
to the molten images, Ye are our gods. Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye
blind, that ye may see. Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my
messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind
as the LORD's servant? Seeing many things, but thou observest not;
opening the ears, but he heareth not. The LORD is well pleased for his
righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.
But this is a people robbed and spoiled; they are all of them snared
in holes, and they are hid in prison houses: they are for a prey, and
none delivereth; for a spoil, and none saith, Restore. Who among you
will give ear to this? who will hearken and hear for the time to come?
Who gave Jacob for a spoil, and Israel to the robbers? did not the
LORD, he against whom we have sinned? for they would not walk in his
ways, neither were they obedient unto his law. Therefore he hath
poured upon him the fury of his anger, and the strength of battle: and
it hath set him on fire round about, yet he knew not; and it burned
him, yet he laid it not to heart."
As you see, saying JC was the servant doesn't fit very well: "Hear, ye
deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see. Who is blind, but my
servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that
is perfect, and blind as the LORD's servant? Seeing many things, but
thou observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not."
According to the NT Jesus was not blind and deaf. Conclusion: JC is
not the servant. Conclusion: The NT is based upon false premises.
It is here literally spelled out who is the servant that Isaiah talks
about: "Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I
sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD's
servant? Seeing many things, but thou observest not; opening the ears,
but he heareth not. The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness'
sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable. But this is a
people robbed and spoiled; they are all of them snared in holes, and
they are hid in prison houses: they are for a prey, and none
delivereth; for a spoil, and none saith, Restore. Who among you will
give ear to this? who will hearken and hear for the time to come? Who
gave JACOB for a spoil, and ISRAEL to the robbers?"
Where it says "But this is a people", (some translations say: But it
is a people), there it says in the original Hebrew: we-hu am bazuz.
That is literally translated: "And HE is a robbed nation/people." The
'he' refers to the servant in the previous verse. The following verses
identify that nation as the people of Israel: "Who gave Jacob for a
spoil, and Israel to the robbers?"
We see here that in Isaiah 41:8-9, that is only twenty verses before
the beginning of chapter 42 about which the NT claimes that the
servant is the messiah, that there the servant is clearly and
undisputed ISRAEL: " But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have
chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend; you whom I took from the
ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to
you: You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off"
We also see that in Isaiah 42:18-25, only fourteen verses after the
beginning of chapter 42 about which the NT claimes that the servant is
the messiah, that there the servant is clearly and undisputed ISRAEL.
So we see that the Christian claim is based upon nothing, and goes
against the context and against the plain text of Isaiah.
> > "From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from
> > Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:3, Mica 4:2
>
> Those are prophesies of Yahashua` the Messiah.
No, they are prophecies of the rooster of Moshe:
A Chassidic Rabbi Makes a Startling Discovery
My name is Moshe and I am a Chassidic Jew who has, from my youth,
learned the words of our Holy Prophets, and has been puzzled by their
meaning.
Then, on the day before Yom Kippur, I contemplated the solemnity of
the day and was made aware of the amazing meaning of G-d's words. I
recognized the fulfillment of 42 Messianic prophecies of the Tenach,
and they changed my life forever.
1. Early in the morning I went to get my rooster to fulfill the
ancient custom. There in the light I looked into his eyes and saw
fulfilled the words, 'I am the rooster* who has seen
affliction.' (Lam. 3:1)
2. I took him and swung him around my head as the verse says, 'And he
circled his head**.' (Lam 3:5)
3. I moved my hands as I swirled him, as it says, 'Only against me did
he turn his hand.' (Lam 3:3)
4. With this he leaped from my hand and started to run. As it says,
'They have run away without seeing good.' (Job 9:25)
5. I cried a short pray to HaShem as it says, 'My words I say out of
the bitterness of my soul.' (Job 10:1)
6. He ran from me, fulfilling the verse, 'To me they showed their back
and not their face.' (Jer. 32:33)
7/8. I borrowed a cane from a man near me so as to catch him with the
rounded edge, as the verse says, 'And Moshe took the stick.' (Ex.
4:20, Num 20:8)
9/10. I tried to catch him with the hook, but only the blows of the
cane hit his back as it says, 'Afflicted by the rod of his
anger.' (Lam. 3:1 and it also says, 'I struck you with the blows of an
enemy.' (Jer. 30:12)
11. He turned to me and I got him right on the cheek fulfilling the
verse, 'I have offered my cheek to the one who strikes me.' (Lam.
3:30)
12. He ran from me into a dark corner and I followed after him, as the
verse says, 'He has led me and driven me into the darkness and not
light.'
(Lam. 3:2)
13. I had him there in the corner as it says; 'All her pursuers
overtook her in the small place.' (Lam. 1:3)
14. He stood there silent, as he had been to this time in fulfillment
of the words of the prophet, 'He was persecuted and afflicted, be he
did not open his mouth.' (Is. 53:7)
15. In that corner there was just nowhere for him to hide from me as
the verse says, 'Can a person hide in a concealed place, and I should
not see him?' (Jer. 23:25)
16. He was now trapped as the verse says, 'He has walled me in so I
cannot escape.' (Lam. 3:7)
17. In his eyes I could see him praying silently to HaShem, 'My G-d my
G-d why have you forsaken me?' (Psalm 22:1)
18. Clearly it was fulfilled for him, 'The mighty ones of Bashan
encircle me.' (Psalm 22:13)
19. I grabbed him and he started to call out to HaShem.
As the verse says, 'My G-d, I call to you by day and you do not answer
and by night and there is no respite.' (Psalm 22:3)
20. But there was no answer as it says, 'Though I would scream out and
plead he shut out my prayer.' (Lam. 3:8)
21. It was clearly the end. I grabbed him and took my place in the
line waiting to give my rooster to the shochet (ritual slaughterer.)
He was silent, 'Like a sheep being led to the slaughter or a ewe to
her sharers he did not open his mouth.' (Is. 53:7)
22. The shochet took him by the neck as it says; 'He grasped me by the
neck.' (Job 16:12)
23. With that he screamed out, 'Be not far from me because distress is
near and there is none to help me.' (Psalm 22:12)
24. He also said, 'Save my soul from the sword.' (Psalm 22:21)
25. He slaughtered him fulfilling 'He was removed from the living
land.' (Is. 53:8)
26. He let the blood fall on the floor, as it says, 'I am poured out
like water.' (Psalm 22:15)
27. I took the dead chicken and gazed at it as the prophet says, 'They
have looked upon me whom they have pierced.' (Zech 12:10)
28/29. I took it to be made kosher. We separated it into pieces
snapping it's bones as the verses say, 'All my bones became
disjointed.' (Psalm 22:15) 'He has broken my bones.' (Lam 3:4)
30. Then I took him home to cook. My wife removed the skin as it says,
'He has worn away my flesh and skin.' (Lam. 3:4)
31. She placed him in a pot with water, as it says, 'For the waters
have reached unto my soul.' (Psalm 69:2)
32. She added many spices as it says, 'And she gave ...many
spices.' (1 Kings 10:10)
33. She covered up the pot so it could cook as it says; 'He has placed
me in darkness.' (Lam 3:6)
34. The smell of it filled the room as it says, 'That the spices may
flow out.' (Song 4:16)
35. After that it was served on the table and we gazed upon it as the
verse says, 'I count my bones and they gaze and look upon me.' (Psalm
22:18)
36. He was divided among the members of my family, as it says,
'Therefore I will divide him among the many.' (Is. 53:12)
37/38. We rejoiced and sang as we ate him, as it says, 'I have become
a thing of laughter for my people, they sing all day long.' (Lam.
3:14) 'In him our hearts were joyful.' (Psalm 33:21)
39/40/41. After which we were full and praised G-d as it says, 'You
shall eat and be satisfied and praise HaShem your G-d.' (Deut.
6:11,8:10,11:15).
42. We truly saw the goodness of G-d as it say, 'You should taste and
see that HaShem is good.' (Psalm 34:9)
There were many more messianic prophecies that I could have added that
applied to my messianic rooster. Many more he will fulfill when he
comes back.
In all seriousness the above example is no different then the lists
claiming 200/300/400 prophecies fulfilled by Jesus. They claim the
odds against a single person fulfilling them are astronomical. Or of
their claims that passages like Psalms 22, or Isaiah 53 are about
their messiah/god. Consider this well when you see or hear the claims
made by missionaries or just simple Christians who you may meet. If
not there may be a prophecy that does really apply: 'They are a people
bereft of council and they don't have understanding.'
* In Hebrew the word 'gever' means both 'man' and 'rooster'berew
** In Hebrew the word is resh aleph shin, which can be read as 'rosh'
head'
(c) Moshe Shulman, 2000
Eliyahu, light unto the nations
"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
"All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we
will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Mica 4:5
This message is sent to you from Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel.
"From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from
Hosea
wrote:
Bs'd
Don't forget that nowhwere in NT JC gets anointed to be king by a
priest or prophet.
So he was not an anointed, so he was not a christ, not a messiah.
Eliyahu
I
>> There are many Christs mentioned in the Bible:
>> 1. CYRUS (Isaiah 45:1)
....
> Don't forget that nowhwere in NT JC gets anointed to be king by a priest
> or prophet.
That is correct. However Cyrus was also not anointed by any Jewish person.
He was Israel's enemy yet chosen by God for a purpose. In the same manner
Jesus may be A Christ sent to Gentiles for the spefic purpose of bringing
them to a love of the One God. Yes, I know Jesus only went to Jews during
his lifetime, but his ideas were taken by Paul to the Gentiles. Even if I
am wrong in this theory, the most important aspect of all religion is to
serve and worship the One God who is not Jesus.
I
> Only Y-H-W-H is called Y-H-W-H.
Most Cjhristians suffer from THE CONFUSION OF LORDS
"LORD" = "YHWH" in the Old Testament (English Translation)
"Lord" = "lord / boss" (refering to Jesus of Nazareth) in the New Testament
(English Translation)
THEREFORE
YHWH = Jesus of Nazareth [LORD = Lord]
The confusion only works because of the substituted word ("LORD") for "YHWH"
in the Old Testament (English Translation) is the same word for "boss" in
the New Testament (English Translation).
However Lord does not always mean mean God in the New Testament (English
Translation).
1 property owners are called Lord (Matt. 20:8, kurios is "owner" - NIV)
2) heads of households were called Lord (Mk 13:35, owner=kurios).
3) slave owners were called Lord (Matt. 10:24, master=kurios).
4) husbands were called Lord (1 Pet. 3:6, master=kurios).
5) a son called his father Lord (Matt. 21:30, sir=kurios).
6) the Roman Emperor was called Lord (Acts 25:26, His Majesty=kurios).
7) Roman authorities were called Lord (Matt. 27:63, sir=kurios).
A better rendering of "Jesus is Lord" is "Jesus is lord" / Jesus is master"
/ "Jesus is boss".
It is NOT a statement that Jesus is God.
> Idol worship is when you worship somebody or something else then the
> one and only God Y-H-W-H who is one.
As a Christian who used to worship Jesus as God, I repented of such idol
worship. God can never be a human. Paul states the same .......
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While they claimed to be wise, in fact they were growing so stupid that they
exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an imitation, for the image of a
mortal human being, or of birds, or animals, or crawling things.
Romans 1:22-23
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Biblical scholars have stated the same .......
######################################
Jesus himself is not the proper object of faith.
...
Jesus called on his followers to trust the Father, to believe in God's
domain or reign. The proper object of faith inspired by Jesus is to trust
what Jesus trusted. For that reasonm, I am not primarily interested in
affirmations about Jesus but in the truths that inspired and informed Jesus.
To call for faith in Jesus is to subsititute the agent for the reality, the
proclaimer for the proclaimed. ...
Jesus pointed to God's domain, something he did not create, something he
did not control. I want to discover what Jesus saw, or heard, or sensed that
was so enchanting, so mezmerizing, so challenging that it held Jesus in its
spell. And I do not want to bhe misled by what his followers did: instead of
looking to see what he saw, his devoted disciples tended to stare at the
pointing finger. Jesus himself should notbe, must not be, the object of
faith. That would be to repeat the idolatry of the first believers.
From Robert W. Funk "Honest To Jesus: Jesus for a New Millenium" (Hodder &
Stoughton: 1996) pp. 304-305
###########################################
Barry OGrady
duke
<swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>Jesus Christ - perfect God and perfect man.
>'There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin;
>He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in'.
>By faith (alone) Not works lest anyone should boast.
Boasting was the Jewish way. They thought they could earn their way into
heaven based on the number of laws they kept.
But it's faith that Jesus alone is the way to the Father. Faith without
works is dead faith. Mat 25:31-46.
The dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Eliyahu
wrote:
> "Eliyahu" wrote:
> > Because they worship a God the Father, and a god the son.
>
> This is why, as a Christian I can no longer worship Jesus as God. The
> mathematics does not add up.
>
> There is only one God worshipped by Abraham, Moses and Jesus.
>
> When Jewish Jesus and his Jewish disciples went to the synagogue and Temple
> they DIDN'T worship Jesus as God there.
>
Bs'd
And when you take notice of the fact that JC didn't fulfill the
messianic prophecies, then you can discard JC completely, and become a
son on Noach.
For the messianic prophecies NOT fulfilled by JC, look here:
http://mountzion.freewebpage.org Look in chapter 3.
Eliyahu
wrote:
> "Hosea" wrote:
> >> There are many Christs mentioned in the Bible:
> >> 1. CYRUS (Isaiah 45:1)
> ....
> > Don't forget that nowhwere in NT JC gets anointed to be king by a priest
> > or prophet.
>
> That is correct. However Cyrus was also not anointed by any Jewish person.
Bs'd
Then probably he was anointed by a VIP from his people.
Sam Taylor
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:15a2e65bm7mdg6ods...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 17:22:52 -0800 (PST), "gs@bigpond"
> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >Jesus Christ - perfect God and perfect man.
> >'There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin;
> >He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in'.
> >By faith (alone) Not works lest anyone should boast.
>
> Boasting was the Jewish way. They thought they could earn their way into
> heaven based on the number of laws they kept.
Malign, and Lie about, because
they lacked the Secret knowledge of the Jesusectomy
G-D recieved in the G-D hospital, and the subsequent
Jesus transplant 33 years Later.
Just plain Sam
A mass most compacted
Might just explode.
I
>> There is only one God worshipped by Abraham, Moses and Jesus.
>> When Jewish Jesus and his Jewish disciples went to the synagogue and
>> Temple
>> they DIDN'T worship Jesus as God there.
...
> And when you take notice of the fact that JC didn't fulfill the
> messianic prophecies, then you can discard JC completely, and become a
> son on Noach.
>
> For the messianic prophecies NOT fulfilled by JC, look here:
> http://mountzion.freewebpage.org Look in chapter 3.
It is true that Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies. Christains
try to squirm their way out of that saying that the unfulfilled prophecies
will happen at his "second coming". Even if it is true Jesus has stiill
fulfilled the messianic prophecies the first time around.
However, the major theme must be the worship of the One God rather than
Jesus.
I
prophecies the first time around." shopuld be "Even if it is true, Jesus has
still NOT fulfilled the messianic prophecies the first time around."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I" <I...@VeraSixmystalkerandtroll00238.com> wrote in message news:...
Linda Lee
> On Nov 14, 3:44 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > It was you who came up with the 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 lie.
>
> Bs'd
>
> So now you think that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 is a lie??
You said:
> And then they come up with ridiculous lies like "1 + 1 + 1 = 1", or
> idiocy like "1 x 1 x 1 = 1".
I meant it was you who came up with the 1 + 1 + 1 = 1 lie.
>
>
> > > So you think that 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
>
> > > Well, we all make mistakes in life. Happens to the best of us. Not
> > > everybody is comfortable with higher mathematics.
> > > But I'll explain this to you.
>
> > > When you have three pieces of fruit, which are all apples, than you
> > > have 1 apple + 1 apple + 1apple = 3 apples.
>
> > > Then you do not have 1 apple x 1 apple x 1 apple = 1 apple, but then
> > > you really have THREE apples.
>
> > So you claim that 1 x 1 x 1 = 3? ROFLOL! Try again. 1 x 1 = 1 x 1 =
> > 1.
>
> I think your intelligence is to low to have a meaningful discussion.
>
> If you can't count to three, than the Almighty will probably hold you
> unaccountable.
There's a difference between multiplication and addition. If you can't
multiply, then the discussion is meaningless. What is 1 x 1? Is it 1
or 2? I'll give you a hint; 1 x 1 is not 2.
Linda Lee
He was the only one ever said to be anointed with the Holy Spirit.
Acts10:38 "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost".
gs@bigpond
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2010, "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> >Jesus Christ - perfect God and perfect man.
> >'There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin;
> >He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in'.
> >By faith (alone) Not works lest anyone should boast.
>
> Boasting was the Jewish way. They thought they could earn their way into
> heaven based on the number of laws they kept.
>
Romans 3 : 20 - 26
By the deeds of the law there shall be no flesh be justified in His
sight:
FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN,
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested,
being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ
unto all them that believe; for there is no difference:
For all have sinned and have come short of the glory of God;
being justified (just as if I died) freely by His grace
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His
blood,
to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past,
through the forebearance of God.
I. To declare, I say, at this time His righteousness,
that He might be just, and the justifier of him/her who believes in
Jesus.
> But it's faith that Jesus alone is the way to the Father.
> Faith without works is dead faith. Mat 25:31-46.
>
You still do not understand that we are saved through faith
(***alone***) ,
not of ourselves, not of works.
the good works ***should follow*** salvation.
Martin Luther was right, see Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
And then turn to 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15 - that's when the works
come in.
The Judgement Seat of Christ
http://www.gracebible.org/Equipping/The%20Judgement%20Seat%20of%20Christ.pdf
Gladys Swager
I
> There's a difference between multiplication and addition.
So 1 father MULTIPLIED by 1 son MULTIPLIED by 1 holy spirit = your god.
HOW do they MULTIPLY each other?????????
You have used the WRONG method.
It is not multiplication but ADDITION.
1 god + 1 god = 1 god = 3 gods.
You need to relearn mathematics.
I
> > There are many Christs mentioned in the Bible:
> > 1. CYRUS (Isaiah 45:1)
> > 2. THE PATRIACHS (Psalm 105:15)
> > 3. ISRAEL (Habakkuk 3:13, Psalm 28: 8; 84:10)
> > 4. JESUS OF NAZARETH (Act 2:36)
...
> He was the only one ever said to be anointed with the Holy Spirit.
NONSENSE! Read the verses above!
Barry OGrady
You still don't understand that Christianity does not need to make
sense.
duke
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:15a2e65bm7mdg6ods...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 17:22:52 -0800 (PST), "gs@bigpond"
>> <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> >Jesus Christ - perfect God and perfect man.
>> >'There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin;
>> >He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in'.
>> >By faith (alone) Not works lest anyone should boast.
>> Boasting was the Jewish way. They thought they could earn their way into
>> heaven based on the number of laws they kept.
>Actualy boasting was the Xtian way, based upon How many Jews they could
>Malign, and Lie about, because
>they lacked the Secret knowledge of the Jesusectomy
>G-D recieved in the G-D hospital, and the subsequent
>Jesus transplant 33 years Later.
>Just plain Sam
Just plain is none too bright.
>A mass most compacted
>Might just explode.
>> But it's faith that Jesus alone is the way to the Father. Faith without
>> works is dead faith. Mat 25:31-46.
Gotcha.
duke
<swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>On Nov 15, 11:35 pm, duke wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Nov 2010, "gs@bigpond" wrote:
>> >Jesus Christ - perfect God and perfect man.
>> >'There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin;
>> >He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in'.
>> >By faith (alone) Not works lest anyone should boast.
>>
>> Boasting was the Jewish way. They thought they could earn their way into
>> heaven based on the number of laws they kept.
>Judaism was a faith based on the Law.
>Romans 3 : 20 - 26
Which Law?
>By the deeds of the law there shall be no flesh be justified in His
>sight:
>FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN,
What's sinful about eating pork?
>But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested,
>being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
>even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ
>unto all them that believe; for there is no difference:
>For all have sinned and have come short of the glory of God;
>being justified (just as if I died) freely by His grace
>through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
>Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His
>blood,
Main Entry:proŁpiŁtiŁaŁtion
1 : the act of propitiating
2 : something that propitiates; specifically : an atoning sacrifice
Main Entry:atone
1 obsolete : RECONCILE
2 : to supply satisfaction for : EXPIATE
intransitive verb : to make amends *atone for sins*
Congrats, gladys. You finally figured out Jesus provided atonement for
sins. You still have to pay your own bill.
>> But it's faith that Jesus alone is the way to the Father.
>> Faith without works is dead faith. Mat 25:31-46.
>You still do not understand that we are saved through faith
>(***alone***) ,
Jesus never said that. Lut tried to add that.
gs@bigpond
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> >On Nov 15, 11:35 pm, duke wrote:
> >> On Sun, 14 Nov 2010, "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> >> >Jesus Christ - perfect God and perfect man.
> >> >'There was none other good enough to pay the price of sin;
> >> >He only could unlock the gate of Heaven and let us in'.
> >> >By faith (alone) Not works lest anyone should boast.
>
> >Romans 3 : 20 - 26
> >By the deeds of the law there shall be no flesh be justified in His
> >sight:
> >FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN,
> >But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested,
> >being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
> >even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ
> >unto all them that believe; for there is no difference:
> >For all have sinned and have come short of the glory of God;
> >being justified (just as if I died) freely by His grace
> >through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
> >Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His
> >blood,
>
> Congrats, gladys. You finally figured out Jesus provided atonement for
> sins. You still have to pay your own bill.
>
The wages of sin is death, but ***the gift of God*** is Eternal Life
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6 : 23
> >> But it's faith that Jesus alone is the way to the Father.
> >> Faith without works is dead faith. Mat 25:31-46.
> >You still do not understand that we are saved through faith
> >(***alone***) ,
so I do not 'have to pay my own bill'.
> Jesus never said that. <Luther> tried to add that. (alone)
>
Luther realised that as Paul said that we are saved through faith
***not of ourselves** -the good that we can do ie ***not of
works***
that salvation was through faith ***alone***.
But then Paul did not sit down on his hands and preach 'hip, hip,
hurray'
I do not have to go witnessing for Jesus'.
My understandings are that the leaders at the R.Catholic Church
have imposed a series of rules (ie heresies and traditions) that were
designed to keep its members in obedience to those rulings
ie so the Popes and cardinals had control over the members
who being illiterate in the Biblical writings accepted them as the
truth.
It was priests such as John Wycliffe, Jan Hus and Martin Luther
who were literate, highly trained men, who understood what
the hierarchy at Rome was doing. And they understood their own
situation
as it was in 1184AD that the Inquisition had been imposed against
those
who dared to question the authorities of the Popes.
It is all there in the Internet articles if you will take your eyes
from
your Missal and read the decrees against those who dared question
the authority of the Popes.
And modern-day Popes are using glittsy public relations in front of
television cameras to catch the unwary into the R.Catholic Church.
Were you brought back into the RC Church by such media presentations?
And do you think that by bringing me back into the R.C membership
which I only knew of many years later that you will have x number of
sins
absolved 'wiped off your slate'?
Well, I can assure you it will not work that way.
Jesus said. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten
Son
that whosoever believes in Him (meaning Himself) , should not perish,
but ***have Everlasting Life*** (John 3 : 16)
You are so invovled with the thought of paying one's own bill,
that you have no understanding that Jesus, as He was resurrected,
overcame death - therefore He paid those wages -
and gives us Everalasting Life in Eternity on His terms
ie through faith in Him.
Then that faith does not mean that I sit down on my hands
and do nothing about it.
Salvation is the gift of God. And salvation means that I do something
about it
in works to help others know what God in Jesus Christ has done for
me.
As I understand the situation, the Roman Catholic Church, from the
early
Fourth Century, began to get the Christian faith into problems.
But the leadership at Rome continues in its arrogance to state they
and their forefathers in the faith did nothing wrong.
You chant that theme all the time as you blame Martin Luther,
perhaps your priest is overemphasising M.L. in an attempt to
minimised the effects of the 500th Anniversary of his work in 2017AD
The Church at Rome has been wrong for about 1700 years from
its first celibacy laws for priests to the present day with its
cononisations
of dead saints - which is also a perversion of the scriptures
1 Thessalonians 4 : 16 - 17
For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the
voice
of the archangel, and with teh trump of God;
***and the dead in Chrsit shall rise first*** then we which remain
shall be
caught up together with them in the cloudes, to meet the Lord in the
air;
and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
Gladys Swager
Sam Taylor
"gs@bigpond" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:1f073749-57b9-4db0...@v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
After You have Your Sins forgiven, YOU MUST NOT
Continue in Sin, so the Law that's in Your Heart better be the same Law Put
forth in Exodus, For THAT LAW defines what Sin is.
Do You sin that grace may more abound?
So it's not the Law that is sin, but how You view that Law is sin.
iregardless if it is in Scripture and or in Your Heart.
What You call salvation is a New Begining, what You
do after that begining is YOUR RESPONSABILITY!
Barry
<swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>On Nov 15, 2:00 pm, "I" wrote:
>> "gs@bigpond" wrote:
><snip see above posting>
>Is Jesus Christ God?
>www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/christ.htm
>>
>God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself
> 2 Corinth. 5 : 19
How long did it take God to destroy the great relationship
we had in the Garden?
>And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
>(and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten
>of the Father, full of grace and truth John 1 : 14
>
>For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth
>came by Jesus Christ John 1 : 17
>
>Jesus Christ is the only person who has been resurrected.
>Death could not hold Him for He is the perfect, Son of God,
>and was God in human flesh.
>"You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God" Matthew 16 : 16.
>
>Luke 1 : 35,
>The angel said, The Holy Ghost shall come upon you, (Mary)
>and the holy thing that is born of you shall be called the Son of
>God."
Jesus must have been a robot.
>Gladys Swager
duke
That's what I said - Jesus is the only way to the Father. And Jesus taught
us the way to follow him.
>> >> But it's faith that Jesus alone is the way to the Father.
>> >> Faith without works is dead faith. Mat 25:31-46.
>> >You still do not understand that we are saved through faith
>> >(***alone***) ,
>so I do not 'have to pay my own bill'.
Then you might consider packing for hot weather. Jesus showed us the way
to the Father - a way that you appear to completely reject.
You just complete reject scripture and the part that Jesus played in
atonement for sins in the world. You claim to have faith in him, but you
hide from what "faith" means. And it doesn't mean giving him lip service.
I hope you do more than that.
>> Jesus never said that. <Luther> tried to add that. (alone)
>Luther realised that as Paul said that we are saved through faith
>***not of ourselves** -the good that we can do ie ***not of
>works***
>that salvation was through faith ***alone***.
Nope, that's not what scripture says. To have faith means to follow.
>But then Paul did not sit down on his hands and preach 'hip, hip,
>hurray' I do not have to go witnessing for Jesus'.
John 14:12 (New International Version)
12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have
been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am
going to the Father.
James 2:26 (New International Version)
26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
>My understandings
are typically wrong.
You don't.
>, the Roman Catholic Church, from the
>early
>Fourth Century, began to get the Christian faith into problems.
>But the leadership at Rome continues in its arrogance to state they
>and their forefathers in the faith did nothing wrong.
>You chant that theme all the time as you blame Martin Luther,
>perhaps your priest is overemphasising M.L. in an attempt to
>minimised the effects of the 500th Anniversary of his work in 2017AD
>The Church at Rome has been wrong for about 1700 years from
>its first celibacy laws for priests to the present day with its
>cononisations
>of dead saints - which is also a perversion of the scriptures
>1 Thessalonians 4 : 16 - 17
>For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the
>voice
>of the archangel, and with teh trump of God;
>***and the dead in Chrsit shall rise first*** then we which remain
>shall be
>caught up together with them in the cloudes, to meet the Lord in the
>air;
>and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
>Gladys Swager
The dukester, American-American
duke
Impossible. Heb 4:15. The moment you embrace a bad thought, you have
sinned against God.
>, so the Law that's in Your Heart better be the same Law Put
>forth in Exodus, For THAT LAW defines what Sin is.
>Do You sin that grace may more abound?
>So it's not the Law that is sin, but how You view that Law is sin.
>iregardless if it is in Scripture and or in Your Heart.
Exodus and the Levi Laws is for Jews. Christ gave us a new covenant
written on the heart to replace the old covenant, which is old and worn
out.
>What You call salvation is a New Begining, what You
>do after that begining is YOUR RESPONSABILITY!
Totally over gladys' head.
Eliyahu
> "Eliyahu" <silvermountz...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b5954f5a-8144-4b2b...@v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 14, 1:51 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 13, 11:38 pm, Eliyahu <silvermountz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 13, 8:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 13, 12:40 pm, Eliyahu <silvermountz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Bs'd
>
> > > > > The Bible teaches us that God is one:
>
> > > > > "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
>
> > > > > Standard Bible
>
> > > > > "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." English
> Standard
> > > > > Version
>
> > > > > "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" New American
> > > > > Standard Bible
>
> > > > > "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." New
> > > > > International Version
>
> > > > > "And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one
> > > > > another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, "Which
> > > > > commandment is the first of all?"] Jesus answered, "The first is,
> > > > > `Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, THE LORD IS ONE; and you shall
> > > > > love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul,
> > > > > and with all your mind, and with all your strength.'
> > > > > The second is this, `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'
> There
> > > > > is no other commandment greater than these." And the scribe said to
> > > > > him, "You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that HE IS ONE,
> and
> > > > > there is no other but he; and to love him with all the heart, and
> with
> > > > > all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love one's
> > > > > neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and
> > > > > sacrifices." And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to
> > > > > him, "You are > not far from the kingdom of God.""
> > > > > Mark 12:28-34 Revised Standard Version
>
> > > > The scribe was "NOT FAR FROM the kingdom of God", but the scribe still
> > > > was not IN the kingdom of God because he didn't accept Yahashua` as
> > > > the Messiah, God incarnate as our only Saviour, even though he
> > > > understood the real law was one of good works, not the works of the
> > > > 613 precepts of the Law of Moses.
>
> > > > > "Now an intermediary implies more than one; but GOD IS ONE." Gal
> > > > > 3:20 Revised Standard Version
>
> > > > > "You believe that GOD IS ONE; you do well." James 2:19 Revised
> > > > > Standard Version
> > > > So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
>
>
> > > Because they worship a God the Father, and a god the son.
>
> > you're thinking of Hinduism. Christians worship only One GOD who is
> > the Father of all spirits of all flesh, and is the Holy Spirit who,
> > when He was incarnate, was called the Son of God.
>
> Bs'd
>
> So you are worshiping a "God the Father" and a "god the son".
>
> So what are you whining that it is a lie when I say so?
>
> > > And one + one = two, and not one.
>
>
> > Your equation is wrong. Try 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
>
> > You can type your lie again and again and again; you won't convince
> > any Christians they worship anyone other than the Almighty God.
>
> If only they only worshiped the one and only God Y-H-W-H who is one.
> But they worship a whole divine family.
>
> And then they come up with ridiculous lies like "1 + 1 + 1 = 1", or
> idiocy like "1 x 1 x 1 = 1".
>
>
> Well, we all make mistakes in life. Happens to the best of us. Not
> everybody is comfortable with higher mathematics.
> But I'll explain this to you.
>
> When you have three pieces of fruit, which are all apples, than you
> have 1 apple + 1 apple + 1apple = 3 apples.
>
> Then you do not have 1 apple x 1 apple x 1 apple = 1 apple, but then
> you really have THREE apples.
>
>
> When you have three persons who are all divine, then you have 1 god +
> 1 god + 1 god = 3 gods.
>
> really have THREE gods.
>
> Got it?
>
> > So who are you to judge Christians as idolaters?
>
>
> But talking is cheap. Everyone can say the most stupid things like
>
>
> "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
>
> "All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we
> will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Mica 4:5
>
> This message is sent to you from Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel.
>
> "From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from
> Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:3, Mica 4:2
>
> Could it be the sqaure root the Sqaure Root of 1 is 1
> Maybe it's the new math, and I am too old to
> understand it?
> if I count them on My fingers I still get 3,
> and if i keep checking My answere , My Fingers get Tired.
Bs'd
Maybe it is 1 + 1 - 1 = 1?
That's correct as well.
Eliyahu
Why can you guys believe in an extra-Biblical pagan totally illogical
trinity, but not in the Biblical fact that God is ONE?
Are you guys that brainwashed?
Eliyahu
kwortham
@j33g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, silverm...@gmail.com says...
Ge:1:26: And God said, *Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness:* and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over
the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and
over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
kwortham
@v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>, silverm...@gmail.com says...
Ge:1:26: And God said, ***Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness***: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and
over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth,
and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
[Hmmmm! This appears to be from early jewish writings]
M't:28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
> Eliyahu
Theo Bekkers
Why do you write "Gotcha" every time you don't have an answer? Shouldn't you
be saying "Got me"?
Theo
Barry
Just BS.
>Maybe it is 1 + 1 - 1 = 1?
>
>That's correct as well.
Christianity does not need to conform to reality.
All things are possible in mythology.
Eliyahu
> In article <05e86405-6804-40e1-bbb0-52350656faa2
>
>
>
> > Bs'd
>
> > Why can you guys believe in an extra-Biblical pagan totally illogical
> > trinity, but not in the Biblical fact that God is ONE?
>
> > Are you guys that brainwashed?
>
> Ge:1:26: And God said, ***Let us make man in our image, after our
> likeness***: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and
> over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth,
> and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
> [Hmmmm! This appears to be from early jewish writings]
Bs'd
Genesis 1:26; "Let us make man" If anybody finds in a text the
word "us", would any normal person assume that it refers to one person
with a multi-personality disorder? Of course not.
But why then, when Christians see the word "us" in the Bible, do they
think that?
Gen 1:26 is used as a 'proof' that there is more than one God, or one
God who is not one, eventhough the Bible clearly teaches that there is
only one God who is one. and despite the fact that there are several
other valid explanations for the plural word "us". One explanation is
that it is a majestic plural as used by kings. Another possible
explanation is that God was talking to the angels.
Some Christians try to refute the last argument by saying that the
angels didn't create. They point to Genesis 1:1; "In the beginning God
created the heavens and the earth." They say: 'God was the creator,
and not the angels.' However, it is a given in Jewish law that an
emissary is equal to the one who sends him. When a Jewish man marries
a woman through an agent, the legal effect is the same as when he
marries her personally. A good Biblical example of this is to be found
in Genesis 19 where is spoken about the destruction of Sodom and
Gomorrah. God sent two angels to destroy the cities, the angels said
to Lot in verse 13: "For we are about to destroy this place, because
the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and
the LORD has sent us to destroy it." Upon this Lot says to his sons in
law: "Up, get out of this place; for the LORD is about to destroy the
city." Lot didn't say: "The angels are going to destroy the city" He
said: "The LORD (Y-H-W-H in the Hebrew text) is going to destroy the
city". And in verse 29 it is written: "So it was that, when God
destroyed the cities of the valley...." So the angels were send by God
to destroy the cities, but God is considered to be the one who did it,
because He was the one who sent them. So why shouldn't the same hold
true for the creation?
But one way or the other, no plural created man. Look in Genesis 5:1;
"When God created man ..." In Hebrew this is: "bara Elohiem adam" Here
the verb "to create", in Hebrew "bara", is in the singular, indicating
clearly that Elohiem who created man is one. The same goes for the
very first verse of the Bible: "In the beginning God created the
heavens and the earth." The word created is here written in the
singular; it says "bara". If God was a plural, it should have been
"baru".
> M't:28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
> name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Does it say in the above verse that the Father, the son, and the HG
are all gods or divine?
Does it say in the above verse that they are all one?
In short: No trinity to be found in the above verse.
Eliyahu
Eliyahu
Bs'd
And not a single Xian says that he can except the fact that God is
one. Hello Christians, that is HOLY SCRIPTURE.
I'll repeat:
Bs'd
"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
"Listen, Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One" Holman Christian
Standard Bible
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." English Standard
Version
"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" New American
Standard Bible
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." New
International Version
"And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one
another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, "Which
commandment is the first of all?"] Jesus answered, "The first is,
`Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, THE LORD IS ONE; and you shall
love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul,
and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' The second is
this, `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other
commandment greater than these." And the scribe said to him, "You are
right, Teacher; you have truly said that HE IS ONE, and there is no
other but he; and to love him with all the heart, and with all the
understanding, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor
as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices." And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to
him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God."" Mark 12:28-34
Revised StandardVersion
"Now an intermediary implies more than one; but GOD IS ONE." Gal
3:20 Revised Standard Version
"You believe that GOD IS ONE; you do well." James 2:19 Revised
Standard Version
So the Bible teaches clearly that God is ONE.
It is right there, right in front of your noses.
No don't stick your head in the sand, but just look at the facts.
The facts are that God is one, and that there is no trinity to be
found in the Bible.
That makes it very easy, doesn't it?
Doesn't it??
Barry
<silverm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>And not a single Xian says that he can except the fact that God is
>one. Hello Christians, that is HOLY SCRIPTURE.
>
>I'll repeat:
>
>
>"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
>
>"Listen, Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One" Holman Christian
>Standard Bible
>
>"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." English Standard
>Version
>
>"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" New American
>Standard Bible
>
>"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." New
>International Version
You wan't Christians to except those bible passages?
Some do except the concept and some accept it.
Barry OGrady
A biblical fact is not a fact.
>Eliyahu
duke
No, it means that my correspondent has no clue to an open challenge.
Eliyahu
Bs'd
They are all like blind men running after a pagan non-Biblical
illogical trinity, and the BIBLICAL fact that God is one they ignore.
And then they call the Jews blinded....
Eliyahu
I
> M't:28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
> name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
The great commission in Matt 28:18-20 ... is expessed in Matthew's language
and reflects the evangelist's idea of the world mission of the church. Jesus
probably had no idea of launching a world mission and certainly was not an
insitition builder. The three parts of the commission - make disciples,
baptize, and teach - consitute the program adopted from then infant
movement, but do not reflect direct instructions from Jesus. - Funk, Hoover
& The Jesus Seminar "The Five Gospels: Polebridge:1993) p.270
This passage is colour coded BLACK: I would not include this item in the
primary database; Jesus did not say this; it represents the perspective or
content of a later or different tradition.
I
>> M't:28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
>> name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
>
> Does it say in the above verse that the Father, the son, and the HG
> are all gods or divine?
>
> Does it say in the above verse that they are all one?
>
> In short: No trinity to be found in the above verse.
The passage is also not authentic to Jesus and not found elsewhere
..............
kwortham
98a46e...@w18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, silverm...@gmail.com
says...
>
> On Nov 19, 2:13 am, kwortham <kwort...@one.holy.catholic> wrote:
> > In article <05e86405-6804-40e1-bbb0-52350656faa2
> > @v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>, silvermountz...@gmail.com says...
> >
> >
> >
> > > Bs'd
> >
> > > Why can you guys believe in an extra-Biblical pagan totally illogical
> > > trinity, but not in the Biblical fact that God is ONE?
> >
> > > Are you guys that brainwashed?
> >
> > Ge:1:26: And God said, ***Let us make man in our image, after our
> > likeness***: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and
> > over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth,
> > and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
> > [Hmmmm! This appears to be from early jewish writings]
>
> Bs'd
>
> Genesis 1:26; "Let us make man" If anybody finds in a text the
> word "us", would any normal person assume that it refers to one person
> with a multi-personality disorder? Of course not.
Saying that "multi-personality disorders" exist is heretical. You are
dealing with a triune God consisting of three "persons." Saint Augustin
in his excellent work on the Holy Trinity explains this on a level that
anyone can understand. Yet, I doubt you will read it because your motive
is to deny Christ.
The jews rejected and killed Christ just as they have rejected and
killed the profits over history. What separates you from the muslim?
Nothing, since you are two sides of the same coin. As your motive is to
deny Christ, you have to deny all writings that illustrate a triun God.
Another example of which is:
Ge:11:7: Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that
they may not understand one another's speech.
Who is this "us?" Explain this from your denial of God's nature. Choose
any version of Psalms you wish, but what is the meaning of this?
Psalms:110:1: The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand,
until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
kwortham
I...@VeraSixmystalkerandtroll00269.com says...
So you reject anything not colored in red? How would you know the red
unless those that rendered the black gave witness to it? The Church is
the pillar and ground of truth. It is not the color coding of the text.
You have no witness that Christ said anything in scripture outside of
the two thousand year old witness of the the Catholic Church.
--
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how
thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of
God, which is ***the church of the living God,
the pillar and ground of the truth.***
1 Tim 3:15
The Catholic Church - The pillar and ground of truth
for 2000 years.
I
>> > M't:28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in
>> > the
>> > name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
>>
>> The great commission in Matt 28:18-20 ... is expessed in Matthew's
>> language
>> and reflects the evangelist's idea of the world mission of the church.
>> Jesus
>> probably had no idea of launching a world mission and certainly was not
>> an
>> insitition builder. The three parts of the commission - make disciples,
>> baptize, and teach - consitute the program adopted from then infant
>> movement, but do not reflect direct instructions from Jesus. - Funk,
>> Hoover
>> & The Jesus Seminar "The Five Gospels: Polebridge:1993) p.270
>>
>> This passage is colour coded BLACK: I would not include this item in the
>> primary database; Jesus did not say this; it represents the perspective
>> or
>> content of a later or different tradition.
>
> So you reject anything not colored in red?
No. There are MULTIPLE shadings for the DEGREE of authenticity. BLACK is
DEFINITELY not spoken by Jesus. As Matt 28:18-20 WASN'T spoken by Jesus it
can be dismissed as a mandatory commandment to be obeyed or as anything
worthwhile to say about the historic Jesus of Nazareth.
> The Church is the pillar and ground of truth.
Ignorant nonsense! The church is fallible and man-made. God is the pillar
and ground of all truth.
God matters more than the man-made Catholic church and more than the
man-made bible. Placing the church or the bible as greater than God is idol
worship.
I
> You are dealing with a triune God consisting of three "persons."
You are yet to PROVE that assertion.
> Saint Augustin
... was a fallible HUMAN.
He is NOT the last word on anything.
> The jews rejected and killed Christ
Anti-Semitic hate-filled ahistorical nonsense!
The ROMANS crucified Jesus. Go back and read the charge that was placed on
his cross by ROMANS. Jews were NOT allowed to kill a person at that time.
ONLY Romans used crucifixion as a death penalty.
Wasn't your current POPE Ratzinger a member of the HITLER YOUTH????? Do you
hold the same anti-Semitic hatred????????
Why Didn't Pope Pius XII Condemn Hitler and the Holocaust????
You Catholic Jew haters make me sick and ashamed to be a Christian!!!!!
duke
<silverm...@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually it is you that cannot see facts. For the Christian well says that
God is one God in 3 persons - Father, Son, and God's Spirit.
1. Gen 1:26 - let US make man in OUR image.
2. Mat 16:16-17 - son of the Father
3. Mat 28:18 - I have been given all authority in heaven.
4. John 14:16 - the Father will send another in the place of Jesus.
So your challenge is to show the negation of this scripture.
kwortham
I...@VeraSixmystalkerandtroll00269.com says...
>
> "kwortham" <kwor...@one.holy.catholic> wrote:
>
> >> > M't:28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in
> >> > the
> >> > name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
> >>
> >> The great commission in Matt 28:18-20 ... is expessed in Matthew's
> >> language
> >> and reflects the evangelist's idea of the world mission of the church.
> >> Jesus
> >> probably had no idea of launching a world mission and certainly was not
> >> an
> >> insitition builder. The three parts of the commission - make disciples,
> >> baptize, and teach - consitute the program adopted from then infant
> >> movement, but do not reflect direct instructions from Jesus. - Funk,
> >> Hoover
> >> & The Jesus Seminar "The Five Gospels: Polebridge:1993) p.270
> >>
> >> This passage is colour coded BLACK: I would not include this item in the
> >> primary database; Jesus did not say this; it represents the perspective
> >> or
> >> content of a later or different tradition.
> >
> > So you reject anything not colored in red?
>
> No. There are MULTIPLE shadings for the DEGREE of authenticity. BLACK is
> DEFINITELY not spoken by Jesus. As Matt 28:18-20 WASN'T spoken by Jesus it
> can be dismissed as a mandatory commandment to be obeyed or as anything
> worthwhile to say about the historic Jesus of Nazareth.
You ignored the valid point that you would not know which words should
be in red had the men in black words affirmed it. Without the Catholic
Church you would not have a bible. You would not know which writings
were authentic and you would not have the words of Christ preserved and
verified as authentic.
> > The Church is the pillar and ground of truth.
>
> Ignorant nonsense! The church is fallible and man-made. God is the pillar
> and ground of all truth.
Ignorant nonsense you say?! Speaking of ignorance, you don't even read
the Bible which says:
1Tm:3:15: But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest
to behave thyself in the house of God, which is ***the church of the
living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.***
> God matters more than the man-made Catholic church and more than the
> man-made bible. Placing the church or the bible as greater than God is idol
> worship.
By what authority, then, do you make this judgement? Where have we said
that anything is greater than God? By what authority can you judge
anything? Are you saying that God speaks to you personally and only you
know the truth?
Get your facts straight and stop bearing false witness.
I
>> >> The great commission in Matt 28:18-20 ... is expessed in Matthew's
>> >> language and reflects the evangelist's idea of the world mission of
>> >> the church.
>> >> Jesus probably had no idea of launching a world mission and certainly
>> >> was not
>> >> an insitition builder. The three parts of the commission - make
>> >> disciples,
>> >> baptize, and teach - consitute the program adopted from then infant
>> >> movement, but do not reflect direct instructions from Jesus. - Funk,
>> >> Hoover & The Jesus Seminar "The Five Gospels: Polebridge:1993) p.270
>> >> This passage is colour coded BLACK: I would not include this item in
>> >> the
>> >> primary database; Jesus did not say this; it represents the
>> >> perspective
>> >> or content of a later or different tradition.
>> > So you reject anything not colored in red?
>> No. There are MULTIPLE shadings for the DEGREE of authenticity. BLACK is
>> DEFINITELY not spoken by Jesus. As Matt 28:18-20 WASN'T spoken by Jesus
>> it
>> can be dismissed as a mandatory commandment to be obeyed or as anything
>> worthwhile to say about the historic Jesus of Nazareth.
>
> You ignored the valid point that you would not know which words should
> be in red had the men in black words affirmed it.
We know because if CONTEMPORARY BIBLICAL SCHOLARSHIP which is what the Jesus
Seminar who produced this book is all about. Christians do not have to rely
upon past tradition of the Catholic church which does not speak for ALL
Christians.
> Without the Catholic Church you would not have a bible.
Without the Catholic Church we would have had a bible translation IN OUR OWN
LANGUAGE way before the Catholic church allowed it. Without the Catholic
church we would not have had an Inquisition which murdered innocent people.
>> Ignorant nonsense! The church is fallible and man-made. God is the
>> pillar
>> and ground of all truth.
>
> Ignorant nonsense you say?!
Yes.
> Speaking of ignorance, you don't even read
> the Bible which says:
> 1Tm:3:15
Speaking of ignorance, you quoted a FORGERY written 100 - 150 CE when Paul
was DEAD.
See http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1timothy.html
>> God matters more than the man-made Catholic church and more than the
>> man-made bible. Placing the church or the bible as greater than God is
>> idol
>> worship.
>
> By what authority, then, do you make this judgement?
The authority of commonsense and the mind that God gave me to use.
Eliyahu
> The Catholic Church - The pillar and ground of truth
> for 2000 years.
Bs'd
How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church is already 2000
years bowing down to statues?
How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church has thrown all
Gods laws overboard and replaced it with paganism?
How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church has introduced a
illogical pagan non-Biblical trinity which flies right in the face of
the Biblical teaching that God is one?
How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church introduced a man-
god which is nowhere to be found in the Hebrew Bible, thereby leading
the multitudes to idol worship?
duke
wrote:
Thanks for the verse, KWortham.
>
>> God matters more than the man-made Catholic church and more than the
>> man-made bible. Placing the church or the bible as greater than God is idol
>> worship.
>
>By what authority, then, do you make this judgement? Where have we said
>that anything is greater than God? By what authority can you judge
>anything? Are you saying that God speaks to you personally and only you
>know the truth?
>
>Get your facts straight and stop bearing false witness.
The dukester, American-American
duke
<silverm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 21, 3:50 am, kwortham <kwort...@one.holy.catholic> wrote:
>
>> The Catholic Church - The pillar and ground of truth
>> for 2000 years.
>
>Bs'd
>
>How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church is already 2000
>years bowing down to statues?
We don't. It's only a photo of a loved one in plaster fabrication.
>How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church has thrown all
>Gods laws overboard and replaced it with paganism?
God gave us 11. Why don't you follow any?
>How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church has introduced a
>illogical pagan non-Biblical trinity which flies right in the face of
>the Biblical teaching that God is one?
God IS one - the Roman Catholic Church.
>How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church introduced a man-
>god which is nowhere to be found in the Hebrew Bible, thereby leading
>the multitudes to idol worship?
There you go - you're only using the Hebrew bible, whatever that is.
Eliyahu
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 23:31:32 -0800 (PST), Eliyahu
>
> >On Nov 21, 3:50 am, kwortham <kwort...@one.holy.catholic> wrote:
>
> >> The Catholic Church - The pillar and ground of truth
> >> for 2000 years.
>
> >Bs'd
>
> >How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church is already 2000
> >years bowing down to statues?
>
> We don't. It's only a photo of a loved one in plaster fabrication.
Bs'd
Right, that's what they call statues, the things you bow down to.
> >How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church has thrown all
> >Gods laws overboard and replaced it with paganism?
>
> God gave us 11. Why don't you follow any?
You don't follow laws God gave you. Only paganism, like trinity,
sunday, christmass, etc.
> >How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church has introduced a
> >illogical pagan non-Biblical trinity which flies right in the face of
> >the Biblical teaching that God is one?
>
> God IS one - the Roman Catholic Church.
Ah, now except for JC also the church is God.
Wow, you guys are not shy setting up idols.
> >How can you say such a thing when the Catholic Church introduced a man-
> >god which is nowhere to be found in the Hebrew Bible, thereby leading
> >the multitudes to idol worship?
>
> There you go - you're only using the Hebrew bible, whatever that is.
Here you find the Hebrew Bible: http://www.karaite-korner.org/tanach/index.html
Eliyahu
Linda Lee
> Can the Christians accept the Biblical fact that God is one? WHY NOT???
Christians already know that God is One.
You are probably trying to be nice, trying to be a light to the
Gentiles, because you believe references in Isaiah 42 and 49 to the
servant (personified as Israel in Isaiah 49) being a light unto the
Gentiles refers to the nation of Israel. But many Gentiles have
already been enlightened by the Messiah, and it was he who was to be a
light to the Gentiles.
Isa. 42:6 "I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will
hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of
the people, for a light of the Gentiles".
Isa. 49:6 "And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my
servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved
of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that
thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth".
Now if you, as an Israelite, are to be a light to the Gentiles, why do
the Hebrew Scriptures say (also in Isaiah) that God blinded and
deafened you and that you will remain that way until all the cities
are wasted and uninhabited?
It is you whom God has made deaf and blind, and Gentiles whom God has
enlightened.
We're supposed to listen to you when not only the Messiah says you're
blind, but your own Scriptures say God blinded and deafened you, so
you cannot understand, and that you'll remain that way until the
cities are no longer inhabited?
Yahashua` the Messiah said of the unbelieving Israelites:
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias [Isaiah],
which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and
seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are
dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time
they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should
understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should
heal them.
Mat 13:16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for
they hear.
Mat 13:17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous
men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen
them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
How long did God say the people of Israel will be deaf and blind?
Isa 6:9 And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but
understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
Isa 6:10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears
heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear
with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be
healed.
Isa 6:11 Then said I, Lord, ***how long?*** And he answered, Until
the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man,
and the land be utterly desolate,
Isa 60:1 Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the
LORD is risen upon thee.
Isa 60:2 For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross
darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory
shall be seen upon thee.
Isa 60:3 And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the
brightness of thy rising.
Luk 2:25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was
Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the
consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.
Luk 2:26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he
should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.
Luk 2:27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the
parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of
the law,
Luk 2:28 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,
Luk 2:29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace,
according to thy word:
Luk 2:30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,
Luk 2:31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;
Luk 2:32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people
Israel.
If you want to be listened to, you first need to explain how you are
not deaf and blind like Isa. 6:9-11 says you will be until the cities
lay uninhabited.
Sam Taylor
don't get down on the RCC without them,
the rest of us wouldn't know what the Norwegian Jesus really looked like.
They had a photograph, We all have in front of our bibles.
dressed to the nines in the 30's
gs@bigpond
> "kwortham" wrote:
> >> >> The great commission in Matt 28:18-20 ... is expessed in Matthew's
> >> >> language and reflects the evangelist's idea of the world mission of
> >> >> the church.
> >> >> Jesus probably had no idea of launching a world mission and certainly
> >> >> was not an insitition builder. The three parts of the commission - make
> >> >> disciples, baptize, and teach - consitute the program adopted
> >> >> from then infant movement, but do not reflect direct instructions
> >> >> from Jesus. - Funk, Hoover & The Jesus Seminar "The Five Gospels:
> >> >> Polebridge:1993) p.270
> >> >> This passage is colour coded BLACK: I would not include this item in
> >> >> the primary database; Jesus did not say this; it represents the
> >> >> perspective or content of a later or different tradition.
> >> > So you reject anything not colored in red?
> >> No. There are MULTIPLE shadings for the DEGREE of authenticity. BLACK is
> >> DEFINITELY not spoken by Jesus. As Matt 28:18-20 WASN'T spoken by Jesus
> >> it can be dismissed as a mandatory commandment to be obeyed
> >> or as anything worthwhile to say about the historic Jesus of Nazareth.
>
> > You ignored the valid point that you would not know which words should
> > be in red had the men in black words affirmed it.
>
> Seminar who produced this book is all about.
The Jesus Seminar is a group of 50 (?) Biblical scholars, but have
they been right
in all their deliberations?
http://www.allaboutreligion.org/critics-of-the-jesus-seminar-faq.htm
> Christians do not have to rely upon past tradition of the Catholic church
> which does not speak for ALL Christians.
>
> > Without the Catholic Church you would not have a bible.
>
The epistles were not all written by the Christians at Rome.
The Catholic Church from Rome only gained authority over all
Christians
from the early Fourth Century. (I would have to search webpages again
for that information. Until that time there was a consneus decision
policy among
the leaders (bishops) of all teh churches in the Mediterranean
area.
> Without the Catholic Church we would have had a bible translation IN OUR OWN
> LANGUAGE way before the Catholic church allowed it. Without the Catholic
> church we would not have had an Inquisition which murdered innocent people.
>
The translation of the Bible into the English language was made by
John Wycliffe
in the late 1300's. (Whether that was the first into a local
vernacular language,
I do not know)
The problem at that time was that copies had to be made by hand that
was
very time consuming. In 1440 Johannes Gutenburg invented the printing-
press
which meant that the Bible could be printed at much greater spead,
but certainly not a tthe speed of today's printing processes.
It all took time for the developments to come.
> >> Ignorant nonsense! The church is fallible and man-made. God is the
> >> pillar and ground of all truth.
Checking my KJV Bible, Zondervan Publication, Paul wrote to Timothy
when the latter person was ministering at Ephesus.
'The church of the Living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" 1
Timothy 3 : 15
That does not specify that the Church that was at Rome was exclusively
that
church and the leader of all Christians in the eastern Mediterranean
area.
>
> > Ignorant nonsense you say?!
> > Speaking of ignorance, you don't even read the Bible which says:
> > 1Tm:3:15
>
> Speaking of ignorance, you quoted a FORGERY written 100 - 150 CE when Paul
> was DEAD.
> Seehttp://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1timothy.html
>
If you are dating from the first known manuscript(s) available today
-
then it is obvious that it/they is/are copies of previous manuscripts
that are now lost or not yet discovered.
> >> God matters more than the man-made Catholic church and more than the
> >> man-made bible. Placing the church or the bible as greater than God is
> >> idol worship.
>
> > By what authority, then, do you make this judgement?
>
> The authority of commonsense and the mind that God gave me to use.-
But is the Bible 'man-made'?
2 Timothy 3 : 16 - 17 All scripture is given ***by inspiration of
God***,
and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,
for instruction in righteousness that the (wo)man of God may be
perfect,
thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
The human mind is only authorative in respect of the learnings
acquired in
previous years. I had schooling and teacher training (1930's to 1940's
and
further training in the late 1970's) from which I changed some
previous
understandings in minor ways. As far as I understand, that inspired
some later more comprehensive developments.
However all later ideas must be carefully assessed -
more modern does not always mean better or more accurate.
Gladys Swager
Theo Bekkers
"gs@bigpond" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote
>> "kwortham" wrote:
>> > Without the Catholic Church you would not have a bible.
> The epistles were not all written by the Christians at Rome.
> The Catholic Church from Rome only gained authority over all
> Christians
> from the early Fourth Century. (I would have to search webpages again
> for that information. Until that time there was a consneus decision
> policy among
> the leaders (bishops) of all teh churches in the Mediterranean
> area.
Gladys, Gladys, how can you manage to get everything wrong?
There was no gaining of authority by the Christians at Rome. Rome wanted to
unite the various Episcopalities under one management authority. Several
churches decided against joining with Rome and stay separate until the
present day. These churches are known as the Orthodox churches (remember
Father James?) and each Orthodox church remains independent. They do claim
apostolic succession and the RC agrees that they have that. The Protestant
churches do not.
Theo
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote
>
> >> "kwortham" wrote:
> >> > Without the Catholic Church you would not have a bible.
> > The epistles were not all written by the Christians at Rome.
> > The Catholic Church from Rome only gained authority over all
> > Christians
> > from the early Fourth Century. (I would have to search webpages again
> > for that information. Until that time there was a consneus decision
> > policy among
> > area.
>
> Gladys, Gladys, how can you manage to get everything wrong?
> There was no gaining of authority by the Christians at Rome. Rome wanted to
> unite the various Episcopalities under one management authority. Several
> churches decided against joining with Rome and stay separate until the
> present day. These churches are known as the Orthodox churches (remember
> Father James?) and each Orthodox church remains independent. They do claim
> apostolic succession and the RC agrees that they have that. The Protestant
> churches do not.
>
emperor ruled.
The Eastern Orthodox Churches broke away in 1954AD
mainly over the Filoque Clause of the Creed.
The R.Catholic Church sends an observer to the World Council of
Churches
(begun in 1948 - headquarters in Switzerland), but has chosen not to
join.
I can only assume that is because the R.Catholic leaders cond\sider
that the their church has the supremacy - from what it terms
'Apostolic Succession' from Peter. But there is no record in the New
Testament
that Peter was ever in Rome. And it is not a succession of leaders,
but a continuance of the teaching of the New Testament faith.
John Paul II, about 1982, when in Sydney stated
"All you wanderers from Rome, return".
Benedict XVI has made apologies about some past actions
of the R.Catholic leaders.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/benedict-xvi-confronts-ghost-jan-hus
but wants to be 'boss' of worlwide Christianity with his seventy
cardinals
(as I have read that number of cardinals live at the Vatican -
stand to be corrected if I am wrong on that number.) .
As far as 'concensus' in the Fourth Century it seems to me to have
been
a political move as Rome was ruling much of the known world
and the bishop at Rome took over control of the Christian faith.
In fact the centre of Christianity should be in Jerusalem,
and without ties to any nationalism.
The fact is that the Vatican needs its own reformation
and it needs to be willing to be one with all the other Christian
groups in
the World Council of Churches - not wanting to dominate all others
as its present policy is.
The Church at Rome is not exlusively 'the pillar and ground of truth'
1 Timothy 3 : 15 Paul was writing to Timothy who was in Ephesus
(modern-day Turkey). He wrote, " these things write I unto you....
that you may know how you ought to behave yourself in the house
of God, which is the church of the living God,
the pillar and ground of truth'.
Nothing there that the Church at Rome -the Roman Catholic Church -
is the authority above all the other churches.
Gladys Swager
Theo Bekkers
"gs@bigpond" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote
> On Dec 7, 10:23 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> Gladys, Gladys, how can you manage to get everything wrong?
>> There was no gaining of authority by the Christians at Rome. Rome wanted
>> to
>> unite the various Episcopalities under one management authority. Several
>> churches decided against joining with Rome and stay separate until the
>> present day. These churches are known as the Orthodox churches (remember
>> Father James?) and each Orthodox church remains independent. They do
>> claim
>> apostolic succession and the RC agrees that they have that. The
>> Protestant
>> churches do not.
>>
> The Church at Rome wanted to rule as in civil affairs the Roman
> emperor ruled.
> The Eastern Orthodox Churches broke away in 1954AD
> mainly over the Filoque Clause of the Creed.
1054 Gladys, 1054.
And the Orthodox Churches, whilst up to this time being part of the 'one and
only Christian Church" never recognised Rome as being in charge. The various
Bishoprics were always independent.
Theo
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote
> > On Dec 7, 10:23 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
> >> Gladys, Gladys, how can you manage to get everything wrong?
I do not think that I have everythng wrong. I di think of these
nesgroups
as a means of sharing the knowledge that we have,
> >> There was no gaining of authority by the Christians at Rome. Rome wanted
> >> to unite the various Episcopalities under one management authority.
> >> Several churches decided against joining with Rome and stay separate
> >> until the present day. These churches are known as the Orthodox churches
> >> (remember Father James?) and each Orthodox church remains independent.
> >> They do claim apostolic succession and the RC agrees that they have that.
> >> The Protestant churches do not.
>
'Apostolic succession' is as good as the ones in the line of
succession.
It can be the means of passing on truth or it can be the means of
reinforcing error
and teaching it as truth. Maryology is one error that has been passed
down through
the centuries. When children are indoctrinated in church schools from
an early age
they do not have the means from that system to refute any errors
that have been taught.
> > The Church at Rome wanted to rule as in civil affairs the Roman
> > emperor ruled.
> > The Eastern Orthodox Churches broke away in 1954AD
> > mainly over the Filoque Clause of the Creed.
>
> 1054 Gladys, 1054.
>
Apologies. I could have 'kicked myself' that I did not notice
that my finger had hit the wrong key, before I had posted the above .
> And the Orthodox Churches, whilst up to this time being part of the 'one and
> only Christian Church" never recognised Rome as being in charge. The various
> Bishoprics were always independent.
>
And what churches do you say are part of the one and only Christian
Church?
How do Protestant churches fit in with your understandings.
>
Hope it is not too hot over in the West. We have missed the heavy
rains that have
afflicted some other parts, especially the Riverina area of NSW.
Gladys Swager
Theo Bekkers
"gs@bigpond" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote
> On Dec 8, 4:43 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> "gs@bigpond" wrote
>> > On Dec 7, 10:23 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> >> Gladys, Gladys, how can you manage to get everything wrong?
>
> I do not think that I have everythng wrong. I di think of these
> nesgroups
> as a means of sharing the knowledge that we have,
>
>> >> There was no gaining of authority by the Christians at Rome. Rome
>> >> wanted
>> >> to unite the various Episcopalities under one management authority.
>> >> Several churches decided against joining with Rome and stay separate
>> >> until the present day. These churches are known as the Orthodox
>> >> churches
>> >> (remember Father James?) and each Orthodox church remains independent.
>> >> They do claim apostolic succession and the RC agrees that they have
>> >> that.
>> >> The Protestant churches do not.
>>
> 'Apostolic succession' is as good as the ones in the line of
> succession.
The RCC holds Apostolic succession as being very important. They say they
have an unbroken line of the handing down of the authority of the Apostles.
>> > The Church at Rome wanted to rule as in civil affairs the Roman
>> > emperor ruled.
>> > The Eastern Orthodox Churches broke away in 1954AD
>> > mainly over the Filoque Clause of the Creed.
>>
>> 1054 Gladys, 1054.
>>
> Apologies. I could have 'kicked myself' that I did not notice
> that my finger had hit the wrong key, before I had posted the above .
>
>> And the Orthodox Churches, whilst up to this time being part of the 'one
>> and
>> only Christian Church" never recognised Rome as being in charge. The
>> various
>> Bishoprics were always independent.
>>
> And what churches do you say are part of the one and only Christian
> Church?
The Orthodox churches Gladys, but only up to the Schism of 1054. The RCC
still considers the Orthodox churches to have Apostolic succession, but have
erred on other things.
> How do Protestant churches fit in with your understandings.
My understanding is that the various breakaway Protestant churches are not
part of the RCC, Their leaders were excommunicated. As a result they do not
have Apostolic succession and the teach heresy. In the eyes of the RCC, of
course.
The Protestant churches teach that the RCC was wrong and all of the other
Protestant churches are also wrong. You must belong to their particular
group to be saved.
> Hope it is not too hot over in the West. We have missed the heavy
> rains that have
> afflicted some other parts, especially the Riverina area of NSW.
We've had our hottest November on record, with only 11 mm of rain during the
month. December has been quite cool so far, and we've had 1 mm of rain so
far.
Theo
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote
> > On Dec 8, 4:43 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
> >> "gs@bigpond" wrote
> >> > On Dec 7, 10:23 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>
> >> >> wanted to unite the various Episcopalities under one management authority.
> >> >> Several churches decided against joining with Rome and stay separate
> >> >> until the present day. These churches are known as the Orthodox
> >> >> churches
> >> >> (remember Father James?) and each Orthodox church remains independent.
> >> >> They do claim apostolic succession and the RC agrees that they have
> >> >> that. The Protestant churches do not.
>
> > 'Apostolic succession' is as good as the ones in the line of
> > succession.
>
> The RCC holds Apostolic succession as being very important. They say they
> have an unbroken line of the handing down of the authority of the Apostles.
>
through
the apostles that is important. From the readings that I have done of
Internet
websites the Church at Rome lost Apostolic teaching of those matters
which they added their own teachings ie ideas a bout Mary,
Purgatory,
Indulgences, celibacy - on that matter they can't have Peter the first
Pope
and celibaby of priests as Peter was a married man -
Apostolic teaching broken by 300AD according to the dating I have,
> The Orthodox churches Gladys, but only up to the Schism of 1054. The RCC
> still considers the Orthodox churches to have Apostolic succession, but have
> erred on other things.
>
> > How do Protestant churches fit in with your understandings.
>
> My understanding is that the various breakaway Protestant churches are not
> part of the RCC, Their leaders were excommunicated. As a result they do not
> have Apostolic succession and they teach heresy. In the eyes of the RCC, of
> course.
>
But Jesus Christ did not excommunicate them. And the Church at Rome
has not accepted their part that pushed the reformers to start their
breakaway movement.
> The Protestant churches teach that the RCC was wrong and all of the other
> Protestant churches are also wrong. You must belong to their particular
> group to be saved.
>
I have not met that in an interdenominatioal Protestant programme with
which
I have been associated at various times since my Primary school days.
It is just wonderful to be in a group in which denominational
allegiances are
hardly ever mentioned, or never; and we are all Christians together.
However, there are groups who are temed cults who have added
teachings
of their own.
We are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is
the gift of God.
Not of works, lest anyone should boast, Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
Gladys Swager
Theo Bekkers
"gs@bigpond" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote
> On Dec 9, 9:08 am, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> The RCC holds Apostolic succession as being very important. They say they
>> have an unbroken line of the handing down of the authority of the
>> Apostles.
>>
> It is the Apostolic teaching (ie the teachings that came from Jesus
> through
> the apostles that is important. From the readings that I have done of
> Internet
> websites the Church at Rome lost Apostolic teaching of those matters
> which they added their own teachings ie ideas a bout Mary,
> Purgatory,
> Indulgences, celibacy - on that matter they can't have Peter the first
> Pope
> and celibaby of priests as Peter was a married man -
> Apostolic teaching broken by 300AD according to the dating I have,
Did you not understand when I said Apostolic succession Gladys. I'll say it
again, Apostolic Succession. Apostolic teaching is something else. The RCC
holds that they have the right to interpret the Bible. Protestants appear to
believe that each person is entitled to interpret the Bible for themselves.
This is why there are some 40,000 denominations of Protestants and only one
RCC.
>> My understanding is that the various breakaway Protestant churches are
>> not
>> part of the RCC, Their leaders were excommunicated. As a result they do
>> not
>> have Apostolic succession and they teach heresy. In the eyes of the RCC,
>> of
>> course.
>>
> But Jesus Christ did not excommunicate them. And the Church at Rome
> has not accepted their part that pushed the reformers to start their
> breakaway movement.
Jesus was dead Gladys. According to the RCC interpretation of the Bible, the
church has the right to excommunicate anyone who disagrees with scripture as
interpreted by the church, having been entrusted with the governing function
by Jesus.
>> The Protestant churches teach that the RCC was wrong and all of the other
>> Protestant churches are also wrong. You must belong to their particular
>> group to be saved.
>>
> I have not met that in an interdenominatioal Protestant programme with
> which
> I have been associated at various times since my Primary school days.
> It is just wonderful to be in a group in which denominational
> allegiances are
> hardly ever mentioned, or never; and we are all Christians together.
Yet you spend all your time in here telling other people that their
interpretations are wrong, wrong, wrong. How did you manage to hold your
tongue in your interdenominational group. I think Protestants have
interdenominational groups because there aren't enough of them in one sect
to make up a congregation. :-)
> However, there are groups who are temed cults who have added
> teachings of their own.
I have told you before Gladys.
A cult is a small unpopular religion.
A religion is a large popular cult.
The words religion and cult are interchangeable.
> We are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is
> the gift of God.
> Not of works, lest anyone should boast, Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
So tell me what the purpose of works are Gladys.
You still have a couple of questions in recent posts of mine that you are
ignoring. Is that because you can't think of an answer, or because you don't
want to think about the question?
Theo
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote
> > On Dec 9, 9:08 am, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
> >> The RCC holds Apostolic succession as being very important. They say they
> >> have an unbroken line of the handing down of the authority of the
> >> Apostles.
>
> > It is the Apostolic teaching (ie the teachings that came from Jesus
> > through the apostles that is important.
> > From the readings that I have done of Internet websites
> > the Church at Rome lost Apostolic teaching of those matters
> > which they added their own teachings ie ideas a bout Mary,
> > Purgatory, Indulgences, celibacy - on that matter they can't
> > have Peter the first Pope
> > Apostolic teaching was broken by 300AD according to the dating I have,
>
> Did you not understand when I said Apostolic succession Gladys.
I did understand, but I chose to reply with the facts that some of
the teachings of the RCC are not in the New Testament but were
formulated
in later centuries.
> I'll say it again, Apostolic Succession. Apostolic teaching is something else.
> The RCC holds that they have the right to interpret the Bible.
Holding of the right to interpret the Bible was not given to the
Christians in Rome.
If you think so, please give me the New Testament references,
Theo.. .
> Protestants appear to
> believe that each person is entitled to interpret the Bible for themselves.
> This is why there are some 40,000 denominations of Protestants and only one
> RCC.
Protestants do not believe that each person is entitled to interpret
the Bible
him(her)self.
However, if a person gathers a number of people to meet together and
certain understandings of beliefs and rules are determined for the
organising
of the group it can be registered, I suppose, with the civil
authorities, as far
as Australia is concerned. .
And concerning the RCC as I have been reading about it since 2008
I see it as a group that through its school system indoctrinates from
an
early age that its rules must be very carefully observed or else!!!!
> >> My understanding is that the various breakaway Protestant churches are
> >> not part of the RCC, Their leaders were excommunicated. As a result they do
> >> not have Apostolic succession and they teach heresy. In the eyes of the RCC,
> >> of course.
>
But the RCC has teachings of its own that are not in the New Testament
-
not hersey to themselves but heresy to Protestants
> > But Jesus Christ did not excommunicate them. And the Church at Rome
> > has not accepted their part that pushed the reformers to start their
> > breakaway movement.
>
> Jesus was dead Gladys. According to the RCC interpretation of the Bible, the
> church has the right to excommunicate anyone who disagrees with scripture as
> interpreted by the church, having been entrusted with the governing function
> by Jesus.
>
But the Church at Rome was not given the authority to determine the
rules for all
Christians. That is their own interpretation of the words of Jesus to
Peter.
> >> The Protestant churches teach that the RCC was wrong and all of the other
> >> Protestant churches are also wrong. You must belong to their particular
> >> group to be saved.
>
> > I have not met that in an interdenominatioal Protestant programme with
> > which
> > I have been associated at various times since my Primary school days.
> > It is just wonderful to be in a group in which denominational
> > allegiances are hardly ever mentioned, or never;
> > and we are all Christians together.
>
> Yet you spend all your time in here telling other people that their
> interpretations are wrong, wrong, wrong. How did you manage to hold your
> tongue in your interdenominational group. I think Protestants have
> interdenominational groups because there aren't enough of them in one sect
> to make up a congregation. :-)
>
Most in this programme have their own denominational allegiances.
> > However, there are groups who are temed cults who have added
> > teachings of their own.
>
> I have told you before Gladys.
> A cult is a small unpopular religion.
> A religion is a large popular cult.
> The words religion and cult are interchangeable.
>
I do not have that meaning of those two words
> > We are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is
> > the gift of God.
> > Not of works, lest anyone should boast, Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
>
> So tell me what the purpose of works are Gladys.
>
Theo, we have been through all this on many times before.
remeber 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15
> You still have a couple of questions in recent posts of mine that you are
> ignoring. Is that because you can't think of an answer, or because you don't
> want to think about the question?
>
Theo, I try to answer all postings to me. Buit there are times when
the postngs
and my answers are repetitive as we are reinforcing our own ideas.
Gladys Swager
kwortham
@j18g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, swa...@ozemail.com.au says...
Again with this claim?! Name one for which we have not already provided
proof. I am ready to repost old posts to you in which I am certain you
have already asked.
> -
> not hersey to themselves but heresy to Protestants
>
> > > But Jesus Christ did not excommunicate them. And the Church at Rome
> > > has not accepted their part that pushed the reformers to start their
> > > breakaway movement.
> >
> > Jesus was dead Gladys. According to the RCC interpretation of the Bible, the
> > church has the right to excommunicate anyone who disagrees with scripture as
> > interpreted by the church, having been entrusted with the governing function
> > by Jesus.
> >
> But the Church at Rome was not given the authority to determine the
> rules for all
> Christians. That is their own interpretation of the words of Jesus to
> Peter.
It was the interpretation of Saint Clement 96AD, Saint Ignatius 105AD,
Saint Martyr 150AD, Saint Irenaeus 170AD and so forth.
[Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 3)] - St. Irenaeus:
"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 preeminent
authority,^*^ that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the
tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who
exist everywhere."
--
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how
thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of
God, which is ***the church of the living God,
the pillar and ground of the truth.***
1 Tim 3:15
The Catholic Church - The pillar and ground of truth
for 2000 years.
gs@bigpond
> In article swa...@ozemail.com.au says...
> > On Dec 9, 10:29 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
> > > "gs@bigpond" wrote
> > > > On Dec 9, 9:08 am, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
> > > >> The RCC holds Apostolic succession as being very important. They say they
> > > >> have an unbroken line of the handing down of the authority of the
> > > >> Apostles.
>
> > > > It is the Apostolic teaching (ie the teachings that came from Jesus
> > > > through the apostles that is important.
> > > > From the readings that I have done of Internet websites
> > > > the Church at Rome lost Apostolic teaching of those matters
> > > > which they added their own teachings ie ideas a bout Mary,
> > > > Purgatory, Indulgences, celibacy - on that matter they can't
> > > > have Peter the first Pope
> > > > and celibacy of priests as Peter was a married man -
> > > > Apostolic teaching was broken by 300AD according to the dating I have,
>
> > > Did you not understand when I said Apostolic succession Gladys.
>
> > I did understand, but I chose to reply with the facts that some of
> > the teachings of the RCC are not in the New Testament but were
> > formulated in later centuries.
> > > I'll say it again, Apostolic Succession.
And Jesus said "You will know the truth and the truth will set you
free."
John 8 : 32
> > >Apostolic teaching is something else.
> > > The RCC holds that they have the right to interpret the Bible.
>
> > Holding of the right to interpret the Bible was not given to the
> > Christians in Rome.
> > If you think so, please give me the New Testament references,
Where in the New Testament does it say that Christians anywhere
can interpret its teachings for themselves?
I am not aware of any verse that states taht. . .
>
> > > Protestants appear to
> > > believe that each person is entitled to interpret the Bible for themselves.
> > > This is why there are some 40,000 denominations of Protestants and only one
> > > RCC.
>
> > Protestants do not believe that each person is entitled to interpret
> > the Bible him(her)self.
> > However, if a person gathers a number of people to meet together and
> > certain understandings of beliefs and rules are determined for the
> > organising of the group it can be registered, I suppose, with the civil
> > authorities, as far as Australia is concerned. .
>
> > And concerning the RCC as I have been reading about it since 2008
> > I see it as a group that through its school system indoctrinates from
> > an early age that its rules must be very carefully observed or else!!!!
>
> > > >> My understanding is that the various breakaway Protestant churches are
> > > >> not part of the RCC, Their leaders were excommunicated. As a result they do
> > > >> not have Apostolic succession and they teach heresy. In the eyes of the RCC,
> > > >> of course.
>
> > But the RCC has teachings of its own that are not in the New Testament
>
> Again with this claim?! Name one for which we have not already provided
> proof. I am ready to repost old posts to you in which I am certain you
> have already asked.
>
You give answers that are proof to you because of your
indoctrinations.
>
> > not hersey to themselves but heresy to Protestants
>
> > > > But Jesus Christ did not excommunicate them. And the Church at Rome
> > > > has not accepted their part that pushed the reformers to start their
> > > > breakaway movement.
>
> > > Jesus was dead Gladys.
Jesus did rise on the third day and ascend into heaven.
What I really meant is that the Protestant movement
has continued to the present day and has witnessed to the teachings
of
Jesus Christ.
> >>According to the RCC interpretation of the Bible, the
> > > church has the right to excommunicate anyone who disagrees with scripture as
> > > interpreted by the church, having been entrusted with the governing function
> > > by Jesus.
>
> > But the Church at Rome was not given the authority to determine the
> > rules for all Christians.
> > That is their own interpretation of the words of Jesus to Peter.
>
> It was the interpretation of Saint Clement 96AD, Saint Ignatius 105AD,
> Saint Martyr 150AD, Saint Irenaeus 170AD and so forth.
>
And remember according to teh New Testament all Christians
are saints.
> [Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 3)] - St. Irenaeus:
> "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 preeminent
> authority,^*^ that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the
> tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who
> exist everywhere."
>
The church existed at many places in the Mediterranean area - but in
not one
of his 14 epistles does Paul and in his 2 epistles does Peter
state that the decisions of the leaders at Rome have to be obeyed.
> But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how
> thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of
> God, which is ***the church of the living God,
> the pillar and ground of the truth.***
> 1 Tim 3:15
And Paul was writng to Timothy at Ephesus and it may have been
that Paul was at Macedonia after his release from prison in Rome.
KJV Bile Zondervan Publication
> The Catholic Church - The pillar and ground of truth
> for 2000 years.-
>
The R.Catholic Church has not been the pillar of truth on all
matters.
About 1870 it refused full Requiem Mass at cremation
but changed that teaching about 1965 to allow full Requiem Mass.
And it needed the doctrine of Papal Infallibilbily in 1870 .....
evidently to convince that Mary had had an Immaculate Conception
(decreed 1854)
when there was no New Testament support for such a doctrine.
The Vatican also condemned Public schools in 1930, but from 1958 to
1960,
in my knowledge (may have been earlier and/or later) the R.Catholic
teachers
in Goulburn NSW were wlling to attend teaching demonstrations by
Public School teachers (including myself) - I have no recall that nuns
and brothers
gave any demonstrations - they may have later in the 1960's.
And a nun had the arrogance to say in Sydney in 2008, "Give us your
children"!!!
Gladys Swager
Theo Bekkers
"gs@bigpond" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote
> On Dec 9, 10:29 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> "gs@bigpond" wrote
>> > On Dec 9, 9:08 am, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> >> The RCC holds Apostolic succession as being very important. They say
>> >> they
>> >> have an unbroken line of the handing down of the authority of the
>> >> Apostles.
>>
>> > It is the Apostolic teaching (ie the teachings that came from Jesus
>> > through the apostles that is important.
>> > From the readings that I have done of Internet websites
>> > the Church at Rome lost Apostolic teaching of those matters
>> > which they added their own teachings ie ideas a bout Mary,
>> > Purgatory, Indulgences, celibacy - on that matter they can't
>> > have Peter the first Pope
>> > and celibacy of priests as Peter was a married man -
>> > Apostolic teaching was broken by 300AD according to the dating I have,
>>
>> Did you not understand when I said Apostolic succession Gladys.
>
> I did understand, but I chose to reply with the facts that some of
> the teachings of the RCC are not in the New Testament but were
> formulated in later centuries.
You chose not to answer because you don't have an answer, or because you
don't like the answer you have?
>> I'll say it again, Apostolic Succession. Apostolic teaching is something
>> else.
>> The RCC holds that they have the right to interpret the Bible.
>
> Holding of the right to interpret the Bible was not given to the
> Christians in Rome.
> If you think so, please give me the New Testament references,
> Theo.. .
The New Testament says somewhere that Jesus gave Peter the responsibility to
head His church. Jesus did not say at any time what should or should not be
included in the New or Old Testaments. The RCC felt that was it's
responsibility.
What gave you the right to leave the Apocrypha out of the Bible when Luther
had included it is his translation?
>> Protestants appear to
>> believe that each person is entitled to interpret the Bible for
>> themselves.
>> This is why there are some 40,000 denominations of Protestants and only
>> one
>> RCC.
>
> Protestants do not believe that each person is entitled to interpret
> the Bible
> him(her)self.
> However, if a person gathers a number of people to meet together and
> certain understandings of beliefs and rules are determined for the
> organising
> of the group it can be registered, I suppose, with the civil
> authorities, as far
> as Australia is concerned. .
So an individual cannot interpret the bible for themself? But a 'number ' of
people can, and then legally declare themselves a new denomination? And then
they can interpret the Bible way way that they please? And it will be
"Truth"?
> And concerning the RCC as I have been reading about it since 2008
> I see it as a group that through its school system indoctrinates from
> an
> early age that its rules must be very carefully observed or else!!!!
Every religion indoctrinates Gladys. That is their core activity.
>> >> My understanding is that the various breakaway Protestant churches are
>> >> not part of the RCC, Their leaders were excommunicated. As a result
>> >> they do
>> >> not have Apostolic succession and they teach heresy. In the eyes of
>> >> the RCC,
>> >> of course.
>>
> But the RCC has teachings of its own that are not in the New Testament
> not hersey to themselves but heresy to Protestants
Gladys, the RCC formulated the Bible, therefore it is theirs to interpret.
Any other interpretation is seen by the RCC as Heresy. Once you are outside
the RCC you are a heretic. Protestants cannot therefore claim anything the
RCC does as heresy.
> But the Church at Rome was not given the authority to determine the
> rules for all
> Christians. That is their own interpretation of the words of Jesus to
> Peter.
Which of the following do you think is correct
http://bible.cc/matthew/16-18.htm
New International Version (©1984)
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church,
and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
New Living Translation (©2007)
Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means 'rock'), and upon this rock
I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it.
English Standard Version (©2001)
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and
the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My
church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
International Standard Version (©2008)
I tell you that you are Peter, and it is on this rock that I will build my
congregation, and the powers of hell will not conquer it.
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
You are Peter, and I can guarantee that on this rock I will build my church.
And the gates of hell will not overpower it.
King James Bible
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
American King James Version
And I say also to you, That you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my
church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
American Standard Version
And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
Bible in Basic English
And I say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock will my church be
based, and the doors of hell will not overcome it.
Douay-Rheims Bible
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my
church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Darby Bible Translation
And I also, I say unto thee that thou art Peter, and on this rock I will
build my assembly, and hades' gates shall not prevail against it.
English Revised Version
And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
Webster's Bible Translation
And I say also to thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build
my church: and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Weymouth New Testament
And I declare to you that you are Peter, and that upon this Rock I will
build my Church, and the might of Hades shall not triumph over it.
World English Bible
I also tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my
assembly, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
Young's Literal Translation
'And I also say to thee, that thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will
build my assembly, and gates of Hades shall not prevail against it;
By the way, this is the correct way to make an argument using a url. Not
www.justgoogleit.com That is a surprising site BTW.
I look forward eagerly to your response.
>> > We are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is
>> > the gift of God.
>> > Not of works, lest anyone should boast, Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
>>
>> So tell me what the purpose of works are Gladys.
>>
> Theo, we have been through all this on many times before.
> remeber 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15
>> You still have a couple of questions in recent posts of mine that you are
>> ignoring. Is that because you can't think of an answer, or because you
>> don't
>> want to think about the question?
>>
> Theo, I try to answer all postings to me. Buit there are times when
> the postngs
> and my answers are repetitive as we are reinforcing our own ideas.
You don't answer Gladys. You sprout creationist websites without making an
argument of your own.
Now please tell me, in your own words, why should you do works when you are
already saved by Grace? Where is the third night between Good Friday and
Easter Sunday? Where did all the Chinese people come from a few hundred
years after Noah? Why does the earth look to be many millions of years old?
etc?
Theo
Barry OGrady
<swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>And Jesus said "You will know the truth and the truth will set you
>free."
The truth will set you free, from Christianity.
>Gladys Swager
gs@bigpond
> "gs@bigpond" wrote
> > On Dec 9, 10:29 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
> >> "gs@bigpond" wrote
> >> > On Dec 9, 9:08 am, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
> >> >> The RCC holds Apostolic succession as being very important. They say
> >> >> they have an unbroken line of the handing down of the authority of the
> >> >> Apostles.
>
> >> > It is the Apostolic teaching (ie the teachings that came from Jesus
> >> > through the apostles that is important.
> >> > From the readings that I have done of Internet websites
> >> > the Church at Rome lost Apostolic teaching of those matters
> >> > Purgatory, Indulgences, celibacy - on that matter they can't
> >> > have Peter the first Pope and celibacy of priests as Peter
> >> >was a married man -
> >> > Apostolic teaching was broken by 300AD according to the dating I have,
>
> >> Did you not understand when I said Apostolic succession Gladys.
>
> > I did understand, but I chose to reply with the facts that some of
> > the teachings of the RCC are not in the New Testament but were
> > formulated in later centuries.
>
> You chose not to answer because you don't have an answer, or because you
> don't like the answer you have?
>
But Apostolic Succession is invalid when teachings other than those
of
the origianl teachings of Jesus Chrsit and from Him, the apostles is
changed
as has been done by teh Church at Rome from the early Fourth Century
to the late Twentieth Century, - and that includes changing previous
teachings
that were imposed on authority as being the truth.
> >> I'll say it again, Apostolic Succession. Apostolic teaching is something
> >> else.
> >> The RCC holds that they have the right to interpret the Bible.
>
> > Holding of the right to interpret the Bible was not given to the
> > Christians in Rome.
> > If you think so, please give me the New Testament references,
> > Theo.. .
>
> The New Testament says somewhere that Jesus gave Peter the responsibility to
> head His church. Jesus did not say at any time what should or should not be
> included in the New or Old Testaments. The RCC felt that was it's
> responsibility.
>
Peter had said of Jesus "You are the Christ, the Son f the Living
God".
to which Jesus answered, " You are Peter (Petros = male)
and upon this rock (Petra = female) I will build my church.
So it was not on Peter that Jesus said He would build His church,
but on what Peter had said about Jesus.
Within a few verses in Matthew's gospel Jesus said of Peter,
"Get you behind me, Satan" - that should be proof enough that Peter
was not the one on whom Jesus would build His church.
Further the RCC had felt it was its responsibility to impose other
rules and rituals on the Christian faith that were not taught by Jesus
Christ
- the continual virginity, her own perfect conception and her bodily
assumption into heaven of Mary,
celibacy of priests, purgatory and indulgences,
the inquisition for those who denied any RC teaching,
cremation as heathenish from 1870 to 1965,
sainthood conferred by the church rather than attributed of all
Christians,
(as New testament teachings)
three miracles (reduced to two miracles by John Paul II) for
canonisation, but all Christians are saints -
except for the New Jerusalem Bible (1985) which has changed the
meaning
of hageos evidently to avoid controversy when the over 1500 persons
beatified by J.P II and Benedict XVI are canonised,
Public Schools condemned, but RC Schools quite prepared to use
advances
made in Public Schools,
> What gave you the right to leave the Apocrypha out of the Bible when Luther
> had included it is his translation?
>
Luther did not make all the changes that were necessary. However, he
did make
the important ones of emphasising that we are saved 'by failh alone
from
Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9 and he did oppose Indulgence moneys going to
rebuild
St Peters Bascilica in Rome, he did give priests the right to marry
and did so
himself, and he translated the Bible into the German language,
wrote some hymns including 'A mighty fortress is our God',
>
> >> Protestants appear to believe that each person is entitled to interpret
> >> the Bible for themselves.
> >> This is why there are some 40,000 denominations of Protestants and only
> >> one RCC.
>
> > Protestants do not believe that each person is entitled to interpret
> > the Bible for him(her)self.
The theologians in the denominations make decisions.
> > However, if a person gathers a number of people to meet together and
> > certain understandings of beliefs and rules are determined for the
> > organising of the group it can be registered, I suppose, with the civil
> > authorities, as far as Australia is concerned. .
>
> So an individual cannot interpret the bible for themself? But a 'number ' of
> people can, and then legally declare themselves a new denomination? And then
> they can interpret the Bible way way that they please? And it will be
> "Truth"?
>
As the RCC has done. Yes, that has brought the divisions within the
Christian
faith. There is need for another Reformation, but there are too many
groups
standing firm that what they teach is the right faith.
> > And concerning the RCC as I have been reading about it since 2008
> > I see it as a group that through its school system indoctrinates from
> > an early age that its rules must be very carefully observed or else!!!!
>
> Every religion indoctrinates Gladys. That is their core activity.
>
But not as thoroughly as the RCC with its school system so those
growing
up under its teachings did not have a means to have any other
teaching
until now.......through the Internet.
> > But the RCC has teachings of its own that are not in the New Testament
> > not hersey to themselves but heresy to Protestants
>
> Gladys, the RCC formulated the Bible, therefore it is theirs to interpret.
> Any other interpretation is seen by the RCC as Heresy. Once you are outside
> the RCC you are a heretic. Protestants cannot therefore claim anything the
> RCC does as heresy.
>
> > But the Church at Rome was not given the authority to determine the
> > rules for all Christians. That is their own interpretation of the words
> > of Jesus to Peter.
And it is their teaching that everyone else is a heretic.
<snipped -words of other translations>
> World English Bible
> I also tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my
> assembly, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
>
Petros (Peter) and Petra (Rock)
Rock of Ages cleft (from cleave = to divide or part by a cutting blow.
Rock of Ages, cleft for me,....Nothing in my hand I bring....
All for sin could not atone...simply to the Cross I cling
Jesus is the Rock ...the foundation of our faith as
Peter said "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God."
> >> > We are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is
> >> > the gift of God.
> >> > Not of works, lest anyone should boast, Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9
>
> >> So tell me what the purpose of works are Gladys.
>
> > Theo, we have been through all this on many times before.
> > remember 1 Corinthians 3 : 11 - 15
> >> You still have a couple of questions in recent posts of mine that you are
> >> ignoring. Is that because you can't think of an answer, or because you
> >> don't want to think about the question?
>
> > Theo, I try to answer all postings to me. Buit there are times when
> > the postngs and my answers are repetitive as we are reinforcing our own ideas.
>
> You don't answer Gladys. You sprout creationist websites without making an
> argument of your own.
> Now please tell me, in your own words, why should you do works when you are
> already saved by Grace? Where is the third night between Good Friday and
> Easter Sunday? Where did all the Chinese people come from a few hundred
> years after Noah? Why does the earth look to be many millions of years old?
> etc?
>
I refer to Creationist websites as I believe they are providing good
answers to
Evolutionists and they do have a right to be heard /read.
http://creation.com/the-origin-of-human-races
http://creation.com/human-population-growth
http://where-are-all-the-people
http://creation.com/where-are-all-the-human-fossils
http://creation.com/noah-and-genetics
Theo, I have not studied in any of the theologies.
I really came into this website to present the point of view that
Christians should sort out their differences --- never expecting
it would give me more problems than enough.
Gladys Swager
gs@bigpond
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2010, "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> >And Jesus said "You will know the truth and the truth will set you
> >free."
>
> The truth will set you free, from Christianity.
>
and also the Old Testament scriptures?
Gladys Swager
Barry OGrady
I have no need to change them.
Who gave you the authority to change the scriptures.
The truth will set you free, from Christianity.
>Gladys Swager
gs@bigpond
> On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> >On Dec 11, 2:32 pm, Barry OGrady wrote:
> >> On Fri, 10 Dec 2010, "gs@bigpond" wrote:
> >> >And Jesus said "You will know the truth and the truth will set you
> >> >free."
>
> >> The truth will set you free, from Christianity.
>
> >And who gave you the authority to change the New Testament scriptures?
> >and also the Old Testament scriptures?
>
> I have no need to change them.
>
God was responsible for the wrongs in the world.
And also it is God who has to right all the wrongs.
>
> The truth will set you free, from Christianity.
>
in both an historical sense and in its present day expression? .
Gladys Swager
-
Theo Bekkers
"gs@bigpond" <swa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:0c239cd5-399e-4436...@r38g2000prj.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 11, 12:52 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> "gs@bigpond" wrote
>> > On Dec 9, 10:29 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote:
>> >> Did you not understand when I said Apostolic succession Gladys.
>>
>> > I did understand, but I chose to reply with the facts that some of
>> > the teachings of the RCC are not in the New Testament but were
>> > formulated in later centuries.
>>
>> You chose not to answer because you don't have an answer, or because you
>> don't like the answer you have?
>>
> I chose to answer as I stated above.
You chose not to answer the question Gladys. Bad Gladys!
>> >> I'll say it again, Apostolic Succession. Apostolic teaching is
>> >> something
>> >> else.
>> >> The RCC holds that they have the right to interpret the Bible.
>>
>> > Holding of the right to interpret the Bible was not given to the
>> > Christians in Rome.
>> > If you think so, please give me the New Testament references,
>> > Theo.. .
>>
>> The New Testament says somewhere that Jesus gave Peter the responsibility
>> to
>> head His church. Jesus did not say at any time what should or should not
>> be
>> included in the New or Old Testaments. The RCC felt that was it's
>> responsibility.
>>
> Peter had said of Jesus "You are the Christ, the Son f the Living
> God".
> to which Jesus answered, " You are Peter (Petros = male)
> and upon this rock (Petra = female) I will build my church.
> So it was not on Peter that Jesus said He would build His church,
> but on what Peter had said about Jesus.
Funny that no-one else interprets it that way.
What's with the Male/Female bit? The gender of a word does not indicate the
gender of the object it refers to Gladys.
The French word for cat is "chat" and it is a male word, so it is "le chat".
Do you imagine from that that all cats in France are male? Where do you
think French kittens come from?
>> What gave you the right to leave the Apocrypha out of the Bible when
>> Luther
>> had included it is his translation?
>>
> Luther did not make all the changes that were necessary.
Luther was wrong in this? Ooooaaah!
> However, he did make
> the important ones of emphasising that we are saved 'by failh alone
> from
> Ephesians 2 : 8 - 9 and he did oppose Indulgence moneys going to
> rebuild St Peters Bascilica in Rome,
Thereby taking the money which was previously going into Luther's pockets.
> he did give priests the right to marry and did so
> himself,
How venal of him.
>> >> Protestants appear to believe that each person is entitled to
>> >> interpret
>> >> the Bible for themselves.
>> >> This is why there are some 40,000 denominations of Protestants and
>> >> only
>> >> one RCC.
>>
>> > Protestants do not believe that each person is entitled to interpret
>> > the Bible for him(her)self.
> The theologians in the denominations make decisions.
>> > However, if a person gathers a number of people to meet together and
>> > certain understandings of beliefs and rules are determined for the
>> > organising of the group it can be registered, I suppose, with the civil
>> > authorities, as far as Australia is concerned. .
>>
>> So an individual cannot interpret the bible for themself? But a 'number '
>> of
>> people can, and then legally declare themselves a new denomination? And
>> then
>> they can interpret the Bible way way that they please? And it will be
>> "Truth"?
>>
> As the RCC has done. Yes, that has brought the divisions within the
> Christian faith.
The RCC represents just over half of the Christians on the planet Gladys.
The division was brought about by Luther et al.
>There is need for another Reformation, but there are too many
> groups standing firm that what they teach is the right faith.
Yes, there is the RCC standing firm on one side with 1.1 billion adherents
and the 34,000 Protestant denominations each on their own side numbering
670 million adherents. Then another 300 million Orthodox. Do you think they
should all agree on the beliefs of one group? Which one? The 80 million
non-denominational Evangelicals? Why?
>> > And concerning the RCC as I have been reading about it since 2008
>> > I see it as a group that through its school system indoctrinates from
>> > an early age that its rules must be very carefully observed or else!!!!
>>
>> Every religion indoctrinates Gladys. That is their core activity.
>>
> But not as thoroughly as the RCC with its school system so those
> growing up under its teachings did not have a means to have any other
> teaching until now.......through the Internet.
Gladys, I went to a Montessori Kindy. Yes, they them back in 1948. Then to
a Catholic Primary for four years. Migrated to Oz and spent two more years
in a Catholic Primary. Three years in a Catholic secondary school and my
last two years in a public High school.
My children started in Catholic primary school and finished their education
in Public schools.
All of my grandchildren are currently at Anglican schools.
Do I think they are being indoctrinated? No, not really, they have a
balanced outlook on life so far.
>> > But the RCC has teachings of its own that are not in the New Testament
>> > not hersey to themselves but heresy to Protestants
You have failed to answer my post asking you to provide instances of the RCC
changing the New Testament as you alleged. Was that a lie Gladys?
>> Gladys, the RCC formulated the Bible, therefore it is theirs to
>> interpret.
>> Any other interpretation is seen by the RCC as Heresy. Once you are
>> outside
>> the RCC you are a heretic. Protestants cannot therefore claim anything
>> the
>> RCC does as heresy.
>>
>> > But the Church at Rome was not given the authority to determine the
>> > rules for all Christians. That is their own interpretation of the
>> > words
>> > of Jesus to Peter.
> And it is their teaching that everyone else is a heretic.
You disagree with the teachings of the RCC you are a heretic in their eyes.
It is their Bible, can you not understand that? I I decide to publish my own
interpretation of the Quran, do you not think that Muslims would consider me
a heretic? Do they have that right? Yes, of course. Would I think I was a
heretic? No, no heretic thinks they are one.
> <snipped -words of other translations>
>> World English Bible
>> I also tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my
>> assembly, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
>>
> Petros (Peter) and Petra (Rock)
> Rock of Ages cleft (from cleave = to divide or part by a cutting blow.
> Rock of Ages, cleft for me,....Nothing in my hand I bring....
> All for sin could not atone...simply to the Cross I cling
> Jesus is the Rock ...the foundation of our faith as
> Peter said "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God."
>> You don't answer Gladys. You sprout creationist websites without making
>> an
>> argument of your own.
>> Now please tell me, in your own words, why should you do works when you
>> are
>> already saved by Grace? Where is the third night between Good Friday and
>> Easter Sunday? Where did all the Chinese people come from a few hundred
>> years after Noah? Why does the earth look to be many millions of years
>> old?
>> etc?
>>
> I refer to Creationist websites as I believe they are providing good
> answers to
> Evolutionists and they do have a right to be heard /read.
Just quoting urls is not making an argument Gladys, and it not answering my
question.
"Now please tell me, in your own words, why ...."
You have failed to make an argument on this point.
Theo