to a more mature adulthood
Timothy Sutter
Sinai was a formal written contract
between God and a peculiar people.
this in itself is unique among
the world's "religious" practices.
never before was there such an actual
"bond" or "ligation" between God and man.
and this bonding came from the other side.
that is, _God_ initiated the Sinai Covenant
and the subsequent full redemption
of mankind thru Christ.
there is no other thing like it anywhere.
God asked for -and- provided the Lamb.
God initiated a covenant of circumcision with Abraham.
unique in all the world.
God explained the circumcision of the heart to Moses.
unique in all the world.
God gave the Holy Spirit to man thru Christ
sealing the covenant of Promise made to Abraham
which -is- a circumcision of the heart and the
vital inscription of God's own manner upon
man thru divine declaration and indwellimg.
taking the contract away from an 'outside looking in'
view of God from afar on tablets of stone and speaking
from behind a veil to an 'inside working out' view of God
inscribed in and on man's own psyche.
unique in all the world.
there is no other.
give one example of a humanly devised "religion"
where "God" is born into a human form for the
sole purpose of shedding blood in a sacrificial
atonement for human beings.
we must disqualify any religion that you,
or a friend of yours, simply make up
today or in the last ~2000 years as
the result of "christian" influence.
so, simply show me a religion where
the "messianic" figure is crucified.
if you cannot, then you make a de facto
admission that "christianity" is unique
in all the world and therefore -not-
a human invention, by your own criterion.
a criterion that claims,
"sameness" means human invention.
unless you can demonstrate that the converse,
'uniqueness means not humanly devised' doesn't hold.
simply put, you will -not- find any
other "religion" where the "messianic"
figure is crucified.
so, the only thing you can do now is
to claim that uniqueness does not
necessarily mean God inspired.
but, your claim that sameness means
human invention is disposed of by
the Crucified Christ.
there is no other.
mind you, if the converse is removed,
the criterion basically loses
its effect entirely.
that is, if one goes and says;
"sameness means human invention"
and then also claims;
"uniqueness means human invention"
the criterion of, let's call it,
"democratized popularity"
takes on the glow of just another
meaningless sleight with zero support.
that is, if the converse is removed, then
sameness and uniqueness has little or no
bearing on whether a "religion" can be
said to be humanly devised or a
direct revelation from God.
trouble is, we know the God of whom we speak.
that Sinai contract seems so alien.
with this special reverence
for pure monogamous marriage.
what group of warlord figures would
suggest that a man take one wife
and never take another?
when historically amongst human beings,
women were considered the booty
of military conquest.
a slavedriver would never give anyone any days off.
so, how can anyone suggest that YHWH
is an ancient warlord archetype when
he institutes some hairbrained idea
like pure monogamous marriage,
and days off from toil?
what slavedriver, or plain old human being,
for that matter, would mandate interest free
loans for and between members of the society?
why only ask 10 measely percent
of any increase as a tax?
[not that the tithe was a tax]
only 99.94% of the population that found
itself affiliated with this contract
rejected it outright and never lived it.
what human being -would- invent such a standard?
only to watch that thing which is the sole
identifying signature of the population
be dashed bashed and discreditted
over and over again?
mandatory rest days, from a warlord figure?
monogamous marriage, from a warlord?
interest free loans from a warlord?
not likely.
and there's other stuff like that.
===
Leviticus 25:35-38
"If one of your brethren becomes poor, and falls
into poverty among you, then you shall help him,
like a stranger or a sojourner, that he may live
with you. Take no usury or interest from him;
but fear your God, that your brother may live with you.
You shall not lend him your money for usury, nor
lend him your food at a profit. I am YHWH your God,
who brought you out of the land of Egypt,
to give you the land of Canaan and to be your God.
Exodus 22:25-26
"If you lend money to one of my people among you
who is needy, do not be like a moneylender; charge
him no interest. If you take your neighbor's cloak
as a pledge, return it to him by sunset,
===
at any rate, no offense, but have you looked
at the interest rates associated with
credit card debt?
it's usurious.
not that anyone's asking -you- people
to offer up loans free of interest,
but usury still ain't too kosher.
yeah, and human beings invented this sort of standard.
power mad control freak human beings
invented -this- sort of standard?
and all this talk about "love" what
warlord figure would institute
crazy things like that?
yeah right, Alexander conquers the plain
and then looks around and starts rambling
on about "love"
that dude drank himself into an early grave
after he had no more battles to fight and
his generals divided up the conquest.
-that's- the more likely human application.
which is funny, i would never say this,
but some might look at the "Law" and suggest
that .....well, that a bunch of women made it up.
but this is highly unlikely.
not in those days.
not even now.
but even 'greece' is tainted by
the existance of Israel as a people.
and who knows who the Dorians
who invaded greece from the North were?
scattered national Israel more than likely.
i mean, it's off that people should
villify YHWH as hyper-masculine and
super-patriarchal when there are these
very gentle statements about being
all nice and stuff.
Alexander turns into Mr. Rogers after he's finished.
not that fatherhood is such an ugly thing.
but Moses is never really looked
upon as some sort of warlord
figure anyway.
so, where they get that i don't know.
evidently becuz Saul replaced YHWH
as King of Israel and he was
a right bloody bastard.
but he was the best Israel had to offer at the time.
seems to me, you can't get
away with calling YHWH a monster.
you -can- get away with calling
a lot of human beings monsters.
but human beings still can't even come
close to living _UP_ to that standard
set down at Sinai.
so they alter that Law to fit themselves better.
why would human beings have to alter a law
they made themselves to fit themselves better?
why would they have to -erode- the impact to make
this Law -less- forceful if they were progressing
from a primitive infancy to a more mature adulthood?
no compute.
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
Timothy Sutter
that I tell My mysteries. Do not let your left hand know what
your right hand is doing."
63) Jesus said, "There was a rich man who had much money. He
said, 'I shall put my money to use so that I may sow, reap,
plant, and fill my storehouse with produce, with the result that
I shall lack nothing. Such were his intentions, but that same
night he died. Let him who has ears hear."
°¤ª
hططططط10
°¤ª
“ Behold, all souls are Mine;
The soul of the father
As well as the soul of the son is Mine;
The soul who sins shall die.
But if a man is just
And does what is lawful and right;
If he has not eaten on the mountains,
Nor lifted up his eyes to the idols
of the house of Israel,
Nor defiled his neighbor’s wife,
Nor approached a woman during her impurity;
If he has not oppressed anyone,
But has restored to the debtor his pledge;
Has robbed no one by violence,
But has given his bread to the hungry
And covered the naked with clothing;
If he has not exacted usury
Nor taken any increase,
But has withdrawn his hand from iniquity
And executed true judgment between man and man;
If he has walked in My statutes
And kept My judgments faithfully—
He is just;
He shall surely live!”
Says the Lord YHWH.