New/Old Testament

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,09:24)

http://www.holysmoke.org/hs00/the-nt2.htm I find it rather amusing that the vast majority of Christians, demonstrating their well-known ignorance, appear to believe that when Jesus ascended into heaven, just before he left, he turned to his disciples and said, “Here lads- your 27 writings. This is your New Testament. Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!”. And off he went – never to be seen again (fortunately………) In reality, the fact is that what constitutes the New Testament today took hundreds of years to sort out. Secondly it is rather “odd” that present-day Christians reject writings that the early Christians did use, and in contrast, they do not accept writings that the early Christians did (Who presumably were in the best position to choose ?). Thirdly, the fact that as the church selected the New Testament canon, it simply selected those writings that agreed, and did not conflict with its already established (manmade) doctrines. Fourthly, if the New Testmaent is the word of God, why did it take God over 300 years to get the right writings accepted ? In sum, the Church and the New Testament are entirely manmade and lacking any sign of any divine origins. The following relates to the composition of the New Testament. ——————————————————————————– The New Testament Canon. For Paul any question was decided by a 'word of the Lord', eg. 1 Thess 4:15; in 1 Cor 9:9,13f he places alongside scriptural proof, the instruction of the Lord. In 1 Cor 11:23f he describes the words of Jesus at the eucharist as the norm for such celebration in the church. A further development arises when Paul is forced to make a decision himself; here he appeals to the fact he has been 'commissioned by the Lord' and possesses the Spirit (1 Cor 7:25,40). Paul even presupposed his letters would be read in the churches and be exchanged (1 Thess 5:26f, 2 Cor 13:12, Rom 16:16- Col 1:1, 4:16). Side by side the church had the scriptures and the words from the prophets, as well as those from the apostles. Ignatius designates as authorities the 'prophets, but above all, the Gospel' (Sm 7:2); the cross was a voice above the written word (Phil. 8). There is no agreement whether 1 Clem or Ignatius knew of a written Gospel – the letters do not say this; as time passed and the voice of the apostles faded, a search began for the written word. The collection of writings most likely began with Paul's – Marcion (ca. 140) did this and 1 Clem originating in Rome uses Rom, Heb and refers to 1 Cor. Ignatius knew of a collection also. In 2 Pet 3:15f there is a ref. to Paul's letters. It has been suggested that the collection arose in Asia Minor and this effec- ted more letter-writing (eg. Rev). In fact, it is not known when this first collection took place. Kummel points out that Ignatius does not refer to any written source and has no knowledge of written Gospels – the idea that the 4 Gospels were brought together at the beginning of the second century 'cannot be proved'. Towards the middle of the 2nd cent, the situation appears to have changed. Tatian then later composed his Diatessaron ('harmony') of all four Gospels. However during this time there was still use of apocryphal gospels and oral Jesus-traditions; there is no evidence the Gospels were read in worship. The main section of the letter of Polycarp uses Gospel material and Paul's letters and 1 Peter. A little later in 2 Clem, the apostles are placed as living authorities alongside the O.T. Barnabas (4:14) gives a saying of Jesus (Matt 22:14) and it is introduced by 'It is written' (ie. Scripture), although the situation is unclear how this arose. In Polycarp's letter (Phil 12:1), there is a quote from Eph 4:26 which is referred to by the expression he uses for the O.T and it seems that he intended to refer to the O.T, although is is possible, though unlilkely, he is referring to Eph in this. About the mid-2nd cent, Justin refers to the service of worship when the 'memoirs of the apostles' were read. Corresponding to this, there are frequent quotes from the synoptics; he stresses these were written by the apostles or their disciples; he includes Mark and Luke in this category. It is not known if Justin knew John although there is an echo of John but this may come from tradition. It is even possible some of the Gospel quotations are from oral tradition. Despite this, he places the Gospels on the same level as the O.T. The Pauline letters are not quoted but he mentions Rev. Marcion in ca. 140 AD, produced a canon of 10 Pauline letters and Luke. This were altered to remove Jewish references. He had a prologue to these letter which attacks the false apostles who taught the Jewish law. It is argued that Marcion took his canon from a church canon already existing, but Harnack believed Marcion was the first to promote the idea. Marcion's canon did not force the canon to be made, but he certainly furthered it. In fact the church adopted the Marcion text forms (Roms doxology) and the Laodiceans, which was rejected by the Muratorian canon as a Marcionite forgery, ie. it is found in some 6th cent Latin Bibles. The next stage was Tatian who was a disciple of Justin. In ca. 170 AD, he constructed a harmony of the four Gospels and showed there was now 4 accepted Gospels. The apologist Athenagoras (ca. 180 AD) cited both Gospels and the O.T. and treated them the same. At this point Paul's writings and the Gospels were being treated as having equal value, although they may not have achieved full equality. One further event assisted the formation; this was the Montanist sect; one result of this sect was the 'Alogi' who threw out John and Rev which they attributed to the Gnostic Cerinthus. Bishop Serapion of Antioch (ca. 200), allowed the Gos of Peter to be read although he later withdrew permission for this. Irenaeus (180 AD) stressed the acceptance of all 4 Gospels which were expanded by Acts; he also adds thirteen letters of Paul. However at this time there was still no fixed canon. Tertullian (220 AD) recognised the 4 Gospels, but the acceptance of the apostolic writings was still fluid. He accepted Acts, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Pet, 1 John, Jude and Rev. He does not mention the Catholic epistles, 2 and 3 John, James and 2 Pet. He called Hebrews the epistle of Barnabas; at one stage he accepted Hermas also. Clem. Alex (190 AD) accepted the 4 Gospels and 14 letters, incl- uding Heb, of Paul and Acts and Rev. However he used the Gos. of Hebrews and Egyptians and also regarded the Rev of Pet, Kerygma of Peter, Barnabas, 1 Clem, Didache and Hermas as scripture. The canon was therefore still very much open at the beginning of the 3rd century and still undecided/unsettled. It appears that at this time the 'canon' was 4 Gospels, the 13 letters of Paul, Acts, 1 Pet, 1 John and Rev whilst the other writings were still disputed. The Muratorian frag. attests to this fact. This is an 8th cent Latin MS and came from a Greek text from the end of the 2nd cent. The beginning is missing and goes on to list the accepted writings; the role of the eyewitness is here emphasised. Wisdom and Rev of Peter were also accepted. Hermas was being read, but not publicly. It lists the writings to be received and details some rejected. 1 Pet is missing and so is Heb, James and 3 John. What becomes clear here is that a writing is not accepted on its content but rather, whether it was written by an apostle or through one. Whilst rejected writings are now known, the apostolic part was still in flux. The Christian apologist Origen (220 AD) had 3 classes of writings – (1)Those uncontest ed – the 4 Gospels, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Pet, 1 John, Acts and Rev. (2)The doubtful- 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Heb, James and Jude. He cited Hermas and the Didache but does not appear to have accepted them into the canon; he does list Barnabas within the N.T though. (3) Those that were rejected. The view on 'accepted writings' was more open-minded in Alexand- ria; different areas did not necessarily agree with others. In the Codex D, Phil, 1 and 2 Thess are missing – no doubt through oversight, but so are the 7 Catholic letters, Rev, Acts and Heb. However Hermas, Acts of Paul, Rev of Peter are included. Methodius of Olympus, an opponent of Origen, quotes all the N.T writings as canonical but also the Rev of Peter, Barnabas and the Didache. Eusebius (330 AD) had three classes of writing – accepted, disputed and those completely rejected. The first set was the Gospels, Acts, l4 letters of Paul (ie. Heb included), l Pet, l John, and 'if one will' Rev. In the second class, this is broken into two groups – the first set that are still esteemed – James, 2 Pet, 2 John; the second group included the Acts of Paul, Rev of Pet, Hermas, Didache, Barnabas and 'if one will' Rev. He says that some accepted the Gos of the Hebrews. In Eusebius' day, the Catholic letters were still disputed and so was Rev. Cyril of Jerusalem, ca. 350, in the 59th or 60th canon of the synod of Laodicea (after 360) and Gregory of Nazianus (d. 390) there are 26 writings – Rev being omitted. In 367 Athanasius issued his Easter letter and lists 27 writings as the only canonical ones; in addition to these and rejected writings, he mentions a 3rd group – those that could be used in instruction – Didache and Hermas. Athanasius was the first to name this collection as the 'kavwv'. Athanasius' authority was such that the canonicity of the 7 Catholic letters was rapidly established although Rev was still disputed. A number of leading Christians did not accept it. There is a list from the 9th cent that omits it and in reality, it was only from the 10th cent that the number of 27 prevails in the Greek church. The Greek influence on the West in deciding about Heb is discernible. The Latin church did not view it as Pauline and Tertullian attributed it to Barnabas. Hilary of Poitiers (d.367) quoted Heb, James and 2 Pet as did others. Doubts remained about it but it was was gradually accepted. Variations continued, eg. Laodiceans is found in MSS of the Vulgate. However it does appear the N.T was settled for the Latin church from the 5th century. *The following deals with the acceptance of two specific books – Hebrews and Revelation – into the canon. Whilst there were a number of books received into the canon, with little or no hesitation, and at an early date, there were several writings that remained on the fringe and were viewed with doubt and only received after a considerable length of time; two such writings were Hebrews and the Revelation. In the case of Heb, there were a number of problems; there is no introductory form that would be found in a letter and it almost appears to be a sermon; early Christian preaching has certainly been identified within Heb, and as its style is reminiscent of the Hellenistic synagogue preaching, as presented for example by Philo of Alexandria, it is not surprising that its unusual style created doubts about its suitability for the canon. One of the principle problems concerning Heb was authorship; the writing is quoted as early as l Clement (17:1, 36:2-5); although the West did not accept Heb as Pauline until the fourth century, the church in the East did; it was through the influence from the East that the West did finally accept it as a Pauline writing. Attributing Heb to Paul inevitably created problems; the language and style of Heb is quite different from that of Paul; there are some 124 words within Heb that are not found in the Pauline writings. The language of Heb corresponds to a sophisticated Hellenistic Greek and manifests a regular carefully rounded sentence structure unlike Paul who sometimes even failed to complete his sentences. One noticeable feature in Heb is that quotations from the O.T are never introduced by the formulas usually used by Paul, eg. 'it is written', 'the scripture says', etc. The unusual features in Heb also distinguishes it from Paul's writing; the title of high priest is frequently attributed to Jesus in Heb, but this title is never used by Paul; unlike Paul's stress on Jesus' resurrection from the dead, Heb is more concerned with his ascension into heaven and his activity there. The problem over authorship is illustrated by the list of 'possible authors' supplied by early Christian writers, eg. Clement of Alexandria (200 AD) believed that Luke could have translated Heb from a letter written by Paul in the Hebrew language; Origen (220 AD) was acquainted with the idea that Clement of Rome had written Heb; since the time of Tertullian (220 AD) ,the person of Barnabas has been suggested as a possible author; Apollos was also suggested. Despite all these suggestions, the authorship is unknown, and it has, traditionally, remained a letter written by Paul. Therefore the obvious problems that Heb created, not only by its unknown authorship, but the contents within it, delayed its acceptance into the canon for a lengthy period of time. It was not recognised as canonical by the West before the third century. In the case of Rev, this was undoubtably written for a specific period of time, ie. the beginning of state persecution in the closing years of the first century. The author identifies himself as 'John' (1:1,4,9, 22:8) and this later led to Rev being attributed to the apostle John. However there is no indication that the writer had seen the earthly Jesus and in fact virtually nothing is said about Jesus' life. Some statements in Rev conflict with Jesus' teachings as in the Gospels (eg. Rev 6:10 when the martyred saints cry for vengeance, with Matt 5:44, when Jesus teaches that persecutors should be loved and prayed for). The realised eschatology of John's Gospel is missing in Rev; instead, there are a number of events to occur before the final climax when Jesus returns and the present system, including the earth itself, is ended (Rev 20-21). The contents of Rev therefore, not surprisingly, led to discussion and dispute about whether it should be received into the canon. Its attitude to the church's enemies was viewed as 'sub-Christian' and its stress on God's wrath eclipses any suggestion of God's love. Doubts about Rev are very clear from early Christian writings; it is omitted in several lists of 'received books' and as early as the third century, some Christians even thought it appropriate to question Rev's authorship in writing; Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria challenged the belief that the apostle John (who he believed had written the Gospel and the three Johannine letters) could have also written Rev; he deals with the differences in style, vocabulary and ideas. In the case of Heb, Dionysius did use this and furthermore, he did view it as a Pauline writing. The Muratorian fragment which is a Latin translation of a Greek canon list usually dated ca. 180-200 AD (although some date it as a century later) lists the accepted writings in Rome, and Rev is included in this; although it mentions writings to be rejected, it does not mention Heb. Irenaeus (180 AD) used most N.T. writings, but he did not use Heb; in the case of Tertullian (220 AD), he used Rev but did not accept Heb. Clement of Alexandria (200 AD) quoted extensively from the N.T writings and although he used Heb, he also quoted from pagan writings, so Clement is not an ideal guide to the church's view towards certain N.T. writings. In the region of Antioch, the canon did not include Rev and even after doubts about the seven 'Catholic' letters had been cleared up in the fifth/sixth centu ries, doubts about Rev still continued. Although doubts continued over certain N.T.writings, one significant event in the church's history in relation to settling its canon was Athanasius' Easter letter of 367; in this he lists the twenty-seven writings as those that were to be received; despite this, doubts did however still linger on. Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem in the mid-fourth century omitted Rev (Catech. IV.36) as did Gregory Nazianzen, bishop of Constantinople in the latter part of the fourth century. Philastrius, bishop of Brixia shortly afterwards omitted Heb from his list. Other Christian leaders, eg. Chrysostom and Theodoret, also rejected Rev. The fourth cent. Codex Sinaiticus has all twenty-seven writings, but it also has 1 and 2 Clement. The fourth century historian Eusebius of Caesarea stated that Heb had been rejected by some as it was not seen as being written by Paul (H.E. III.3.1-5). In H.E. 25.1-7, he lists the accepted writings, but with regard to Rev, this was accepted only 'if it seems right'. He also lists Rev under the category of those writings deemed 'spurious' (ie. doubts about authorship), and adds that Rev was accepted by some, although others rejected it. According to H.E. III.39.12, Eusebius clearly had doubts about Rev himself. In H.E.IV, he comments on Origen's view of accepted writings and states it was unlikely that Heb's author was Paul, but it was possibly Clement bishop of Rome, or Luke. Origen had also classed the different writings into groupings, ie. those to be accepted (he included Rev in this), the doubtful (which included Heb), and those that were rejected. Jerome (ca. 347-420 AD), who was responsible for the Vulgate translation of the Bible did include Heb in his N.T, but was aware of the doubts that had been raised about it. In the same period, Ambrose did not view it as a Pauline letter. The Codex Claromontanus, which is dated ca. sixth century, and apparently of Western origin does include Rev and 'an 'Epistle of Barnabas' which some feel may be Heb. Although it is dated ca. sixth century, some believe that it reflects a view that existed in the third/fourth century. With regard to the formation of the canon, J.N.D. Kelly in Early Christian Doctrines, states, “For example, Hebrews was for long under suspicion in the West, and Revelation was usually excluded in the fourth and fifth centuries where the school of Antioch held sway….” The Stichometry of Nicephorus, usually dated as mid-ninth century omits Rev. The 'Catalogue of the Sixty Canonical Books', transmitted in several MSS, reflects the view of the Greek church at a later date – this however also omits Rev. Therefore even at this late stage in the church's history, it appears some did not accept Rev into the canon. ——————————————————————————– Errors that arose in manuscripts. Examination of different MSS shows the variants which have occurred in the time of copying. In 1707 some 30,000 variants were listed from Greek MSS by John Mill; early this century von Soden printed evidence of some 45,000 variants that he had found in N.T MSS. There are a number of reasons for these variants, eg. (1)If the eye skipped over a word, letter, word or line(s), the error is 'haplography' (“single writing”); (1a) If it was a case of seeing something twice, the error is termed 'dittography' (“double writing”). One example of this can be found in 1 Thess 2:7 – the difference between 'we were gentle' and 'we were babes' (as per RSV footnote), is whether one or 2 'n's' belong in the Greek. In Matt 27:17, the insertion of 'Jesus' before 'Barabbas' in some MSS may arise through repetition (dittography) of the last two letters of the Greek word 'for you' which in fact was the regular abbreviation for 'Jesus'. In contrast to this, it may in fact be a case of haplography where 'Jesus' has been omitted. (2)If the confusion is due to similiar endings on two words or lines, so the intervening words are omitted, this error is termed 'homoeoteleuton' (“similiar ending”); if it is the case of omission due to a similar beginning, it is termed 'homoeoarcton'; an example of this arises in the O.T, ie. 1 Sam 14:41 where several clauses have dropped out in the Hebrew between 'Israel' – the LXX and the Vulgate however preserve the correct reading. (3)A cause for another type of error was the copyist mishearing; if a letter was being dictated, a scribe could mishear things; such a situation appears to have arisen in Rom 5:1 – 'we have peace' and 'let us have peace' (RSV Footnote) which sounded the same in first cent. Greek. This error was possible in N.T copying but not for the O.T -there are no rabbinic references to a practice of reading aloud to a copyist. (4)There were also errors through poor judgement. A copyist might misinterpret the abbreviations that were often used in MSS, especially for 'God' and 'Christ' which were frequently abbreviated. The variants found in 1 Tim 3:16 undoubtably involved this point. On occasion a copyist would have to divide a word; as Greek uncials were written continuously, without a break, a scribe introducing his own word divisions would have to decide upon the position of the word-break. It is was not always clear where a sentence ended; Rom 9:5 is a good example of this and is important as some believe Paul calls Christ 'God' here (although unlikely). (5)Liturgical instructions also appear to have been added in some cases, eg. Acts 8:37 (RSV footnote) which most likely reflects the baptismal confession in the church of the second cent. copyist. 1 Cor 4:6 is a good example of the errors that could arise when notes were added in the margin or under the text; the phrase 'to live according to the scripture' is literally 'not above what is written'; it is suspected that a copyist made an error in the first verses of l Cor 4, then made a note for the next copyist not to repeat this error, but instead, the next copyist not only did this, but also included the instruction which had been left for him. (6)Deliberate alterations also occur in the text; this is due to a number of reasons. Copyists made changes for theological reasons, eg. to remove what appeared to be a contradiction, to expand upon something that he felt was important, to change the meaning to suit his own viewpoint, or changing the statement simply to clarify the meaning. On occasions the copyist might simply make changes to supply a more familiar word, eg. the unusual verb in Mark 6:20 when Herod was 'perplexed' was changed in later MSS to 'did'. Clarification of a verse can be seen by Mark 14:12 'lest…it be forgiven them' becomes in certain MSS 'their sins should be forgiven them'. In John 5:3b-4 (RSV footnote), there is an insertion to explain the conversation that follows. When Matt (27:9) quotes an O.T passage which is mostly from Zechariah but it is attributed to Jeremiah, some MSS show that a copyist has attempted to remove this. In Mark 1:2, two statements are brought together, one from Isaiah and the other from Malachi, but Mark attributes both to Isaiah; again some MSS omit 'Isaiah' to try and remove this error. In time, some copyists felt it would be useful to add further details, eg. in one Old Latin MS, the two thieves being crucified with Christ are given names in Mark 15:27. In Matt 24:36 Jesus states that even the Son did not know when the parousia was to occur and obviously some copyists felt this impugned Jesus' omniscience, and in some MSS 'nor the Son' is missing. It is suspected a copyist's marginal protest note has been included in Luke 16:16-18. In v.16 Jesus states that the law and the prophets were only until John, and in v.l8, Jesus forbids divorce (against the Deut 24:1-2 ruling), but in v.17 he states that not one dot of the law will pass away. Some feel this is a marginal protest against 16:16 (and possibly v.18) by a Jewish-Christian copyist that has been incorporated into the text and hence the apparent contradiction. The view of the copyist towards Jesus' status is reflected in the MSS; in John 1:18 'the only Son' becomes 'the only God' in some MSS; therefore the Christology of the copyist sometimes led to changes being made on occasion. Heb 1:8 has two different renderings and one of these has the Son being addressed as 'God'. The personal view of the copyist could sometimes result in word changes that drastically altered the meaning of the sentence; in the Western text, the Jews 'act evilly' when crucifying Jesus, but in the Codex Vaticanus, the Jews merely act 'in ignorance'. In Acts 2:17 when Peter explains about the prophesy of Joel – that the spirit would be poured out on all flesh – the Codex Bezae has the noun for flesh in the plural to stress that this promise was for all nations and peoples, and not just the Jews. In Vaticanus, the wounded side of Jesus, as detailed in John l9:34 is also introduced at Matt 27:49. One of the most significant additions to N.T writing is Mark 16:9-20; here the abrupt ending of Mark has been continued to include post-resurrection appearances by Jesus to his disciples. The critical time for this was most likely ca. 70-ca. 150 AD; at this time Christian writings were not seen as 'Scripture', but 'guides to Christian living' so there was no real difficulty in making changes. Later on, Origen condemned copyists who made deliberate changes for their 'depraved audacity' and Jerome reported to pope Damascus that 'numerous errors' had arisen through attempted harmonisation by copyists. One rule adopted by those endeavouring to ascertain the original reading is to choose the reading that (a)is the most confused (ii)contradicts or is least likely to agree a statement in another N.T. writing (iii)is shorter. It was usual for a copyist to change a statement to make it clearer, or if it contradicted another passage, or if it could be made to support another passage; a longer passage is therefore most likely the one that has been changed as a copyists would tend to lengthen it to include an explanatory note. The general rule is 'Lectio difficilior probabilior', ie. it affirms the more difficult expression as the one to be regarded as more likely the original.

SOL

Oppologetics at its best.

This source also wrote this…

Quote

When I turned over this statement in my mind, I considered why Mary would want an abortion and decided she should, by all means have had one, if she had so desired. The, I considered, results of Jesus's life and death and could not fathom one truly good thing accomplished by it. That was not necessarily his fault. I have the feeling that Jesus himself wasn't all that bad, just a little misguided into believing he was the son of a God. What resulted after the fact, however, has turned into the nightmare of Western civilization. Jesus should have been aborted. To begin with, the story goes that Mary was raped by the Holy Spirit. There was no consent, just a mere warning by the Angel Gabriel. quot;Hey Mary, you've been chosen to get knocked up by a God! Have fun! Got some shepherds to scare, so see ya! And he was gone. Sure enough, the Holy Spirit showed up while she was sleeping (so she couldn't protest) and impregnated her. This was rape and it was wrong. She was violated and had every right to choose to suffer less for what was done to her.

You should trust the scriptures rather than sources like this.

Is this guy one of the scholars you talk about?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,09:26)

anything the author of that wrote that is just his opinion towards Christ I reject.   He said a couple things offensive towards Christ I do not agree with.   As far as the history lesson though I do agree.

SOL

Yes I see. Kind of like the scriptures you reject when they dont agree with your theology.

God is a God of love. For those who walk in his love through the Spirit have no law. But he is also a God of judgment and wrath for those who reject him.

God is not just a big teddy bear that does not demand holiness and righteosness before him.

He is the potter and we are the clay.

[kenrch]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 08 2008,09:17)

Quote (kenrch @ Jan. 08 2008,08:49) [/quote] WorshippingJesus,Jan. wrote: kenrch Quote Lets get down to the real truth shall we. If we are all led by the same SPIRIT then why do we disagree? Could it be that we disregard what the Spirit says and twist scripture to where it says what WE believe. That's why the “book' is written the way it is ONLY a CHILD can understand it and NOT one who approaches His words with an intellectual, secular prideful attitude. Seems clear to me that the Spirit tried to share the truth with you about the Trinity doctrine BUT instead of accepting WHAT THE SPIRIT SAYS you refuse to let go of your “deep rooted” doctrine of man and so change the Trinity doctrine meaning so you can have your cake and eat it too! “OH their are STILL three but not equal”! It's ALMOST funny! God recognizes the HEART not the words of your prideful intellectual tongue. Look in the mirror my friend. If you base your accusation of me being proud on the fact that I dont believe nor accept yours and others interpretations of the scriptures then how are you any different? Have you changed your theology since comming to this sight? Then I could say you are proud. But you see I dont know your heart and will not make that judgment. Jesus said… Matt 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam [is] in thine own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. Do you also put yourself above the scriptures? You say… Quote God recognizes the HEART not the words of your prideful intellectual tongue. So are you God that you can say my heart is proud? You know nothing of my relationship with God! You know nothing of my love for him! You are not my judge. You constantly patronize me with accusations of being of the harlot the RCC and I have never brightened the door of the RCC. It seems to me that you think that you are the only one to have the truth or who is led by the spirit. Before you condemn me of being proud and not accepting of scriptures, and not listening to the Spirit of God of whom you claim you are listening too, you should consider that maybe you also could be proud by not listening to the Spirit as may be seen by those two yellow blocks by your avatar. Quote Well gees you are quick to judge SOL! Do you know SOL's heart? Nope. Never said anything about his heart or him being proud. I simply defend the scriptures as being inspired and not corrupt. Do you? Quote The fact remains that you and the “other” Trinity boys are NOT Trinity boys at all! Why is that? You even twist the trinity doctrine to suit your beliefs. Your opinion! Quote The scriptures and Jesus Himself said the Father is greater. Straw. Are you less human than the president? How is Jesus any less God than the Father since you can not come to God apart from Jesus. Jesus is everything the Father is. Can you show me a scripture that says otherwise? Quote Gee that should open anyone's eyes that the trinity doctrine is “ANOTHER” false doctrine of the harlot. There we go again weak accusations. Missrepresentation. I am not a Catholic. As far as her doctrines you also hold on to some of their doctrines like the death and burial and ressurection of Jesus. Are you of the whore? Quote But instead of accepting that the Trinity doctrine is false YOU decide to change the definition of the Harlot's doctrine because YOU are so deeply rooted in HER that you can't OR won't SEE. I base my faith in scriptures like you say you do. You are right I am rooted and grounded in my faith. I have been since the day I accepted Christ. I didnt change Gods after I got saved. Quote Now you can go on and rattle your blah blah. I have no love, I judge, I this I that. Never said you have no love. But I have never called you proud or judged your heart or motives for what you believe either. Quote The truth is there is no one on this site that does not judge if that is what you call my speaking the truth about your Harlot~ judging~! Sure we should prove all things and hold fast to that which is good and what we have believed. The problem comes in when men disagree and start judging character and hearts by name calling rather than addressing the reasons for their disagreements. Jesus said he that is for us is not against us. Quote Hey I'm proud of my stripes! The judgments of men! Who knows perhaps I'll EARN another with this post! So you admit you are proud? I certainly dont make that judgment.

Absolutely Gleaming that I earned those stripes that you men have given me for sharing the truth!

Ha! I've got stripes and you don't!

Whatever WJ!

But really WJ you should “come out of her”! And keep the commandments of God! REV 14 :12

[Son of Light]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 08 2008,09:46)

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,09:26) anything the author of that wrote that is just his opinion towards Christ I reject.   He said a couple things offensive towards Christ I do not agree with.   As far as the history lesson though I do agree. SOL Yes I see. Kind of like the scriptures you reject when they dont agree with your theology. God is a God of love. For those who walk in his love through the Spirit have no law. But he is also a God of judgment and wrath for those who reject him. God is not just a big teddy bear that does not demand holiness and righteosness before him. He is the potter and we are the clay.

Actually that is what the Catholics did when deciding what to accept and to reject.

I am guided by two things:

History, evidence and the work of scholars.

The spirit of True Love, True Mercy, True Peace and True Light inside me. Not sometimes love and sometimes hate.

This guy is not a scholar but I used his writing because it contained a good example of the evidence of the history of canon formation.

You may be just clay in the hands of a potter. Jehovah's clay.

I am a son of the Most High; a Son of Light.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,09:58)

Quote Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 08 2008,09:46) Son wrote: anything the author of that wrote that is just his opinion towards Christ I reject.   He said a couple things offensive towards Christ I do not agree with.   As far as the history lesson though I do agree. SOL Yes I see. Kind of like the scriptures you reject when they dont agree with your theology. God is a God of love. For those who walk in his love through the Spirit have no law. But he is also a God of judgment and wrath for those who reject him. God is not just a big teddy bear that does not demand holiness and righteosness before him. He is the potter and we are the clay.

Quote

Actually that is what the Catholics did when deciding what to accept and to reject.

Were you there? Do you have unambiguous proof of your accusations? Or just more apologetics?
Can you prove the text in the Canon were tampered with when there are thousands of copies that agree including the Dead Sea scrolls.

Quote

I am guided by two things: History, evidence and the work of scholars.

The thousands of Canonical manuscripts is plenty of evidence.
As far as scholars, it seems you reject 100s of them. So it is a matter of who you choose to believe and not that you have proof that the text is corrupt.
As far as history, if it contradicts the Hebrew or GT text then why believe it?

Quote

The spirit of True Love, True Mercy, True Peace and True Light inside me. Not sometimes love and sometimes hate.

Is it hate for God to judge his creation?
Can not God do as he wills with that which is his?
Would it be Love for God to let evil continue without judgment?

Quote

This guy is not a scholar but I used his writing because it contained a good example of the evidence of the history of canon formation.

I see. Maybe you should get your history from someone besides an agnostic and unbeliever. Try this sight for start…

http://www.carm.org/questions/gospels_written.htm

Quote

You may be just clay in the hands of a potter.  Jehovah's clay. I am a son of the Most High; a Son of Light.

Really. So your inference is I am a child of satan the god of this world, Jehovah right?

So you dont believe the Hebrew scriptures nor the writings of Paul?…

Rom 9:20
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Gen 14:22
And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the LORD (YHWH), the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,

2 Sam 22:14
The LORD (YHWH) thundered from heaven, and the most High uttered his voice.

Pss 7:17
I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD (YHWH) most high.

Pss 21:7
I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD (YHWH) most high.

Pss 47:2
For the LORD (YHWH) most high is terrible; he is a great King over all the earth.

Ps 83:18
That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH (YHWH), art the most high over all the earth.

Pss 91:9
Because thou hast made the LORD (YHWH), which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation;

Pss 92:1
It is a good thing to give thanks unto the LORD (YHWH), and to sing praises unto thy name, O most High:

   

[Son of Light]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 08 2008,18:07)

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,09:58) Quote Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 08 2008,09:46) Son wrote: anything the author of that wrote that is just his opinion towards Christ I reject.   He said a couple things offensive towards Christ I do not agree with.   As far as the history lesson though I do agree. SOL Yes I see. Kind of like the scriptures you reject when they dont agree with your theology. God is a God of love. For those who walk in his love through the Spirit have no law. But he is also a God of judgment and wrath for those who reject him. God is not just a big teddy bear that does not demand holiness and righteosness before him. He is the potter and we are the clay. Quote Actually that is what the Catholics did when deciding what to accept and to reject. Were you there? Do you have unambiguous proof of your accusations? Or just more apologetics? Can you prove the text in the Canon were tampered with when there are thousands of copies that agree including the Dead Sea scrolls. Quote I am guided by two things: History, evidence and the work of scholars. The thousands of Canonical manuscripts is plenty of evidence. As far as scholars, it seems you reject 100s of them. So it is a matter of who you choose to believe and not that you have proof that the text is corrupt. As far as history, if it contradicts the Hebrew or GT text then why believe it? Quote The spirit of True Love, True Mercy, True Peace and True Light inside me. Not sometimes love and sometimes hate. Is it hate for God to judge his creation? Can not God do as he wills with that which is his? Would it be Love for God to let evil continue without judgment? Quote This guy is not a scholar but I used his writing because it contained a good example of the evidence of the history of canon formation. I see. Maybe you should get your history from someone besides an agnostic and unbeliever. Try this sight for start… http://www.carm.org/questions/gospels_written.htm Quote You may be just clay in the hands of a potter.  Jehovah's clay. I am a son of the Most High; a Son of Light. Really. So your inference is I am a child of satan the god of this world, Jehovah right? So you dont believe the Hebrew scriptures nor the writings of Paul?… Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? Gen 14:22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the LORD (YHWH), the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth, 2 Sam 22:14 The LORD (YHWH) thundered from heaven, and the most High uttered his voice. Pss 7:17 I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD (YHWH) most high. Pss 21:7 I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD (YHWH) most high. Pss 47:2 For the LORD (YHWH) most high is terrible; he is a great King over all the earth. Ps 83:18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH (YHWH), art the most high over all the earth. Pss 91:9 Because thou hast made the LORD (YHWH), which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation; Pss 92:1 It is a good thing to give thanks unto the LORD (YHWH), and to sing praises unto thy name, O most High:

I used to rely on Christian scholars and apolegists until I kept studying and kept calling their bluff.

They are just not very intectually and spiritually honest.

If you really really think that the things Jehovah did in the old testament is good or acceptable (see my post in the who is yhwh thread) then, yes you are a child of darkness.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,18:17)

[/quote] Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 08 2008,18:07) Son wrote: Quote Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 08 2008,09:46) Son wrote: anything the author of that wrote that is just his opinion towards Christ I reject.   He said a couple things offensive towards Christ I do not agree with.   As far as the history lesson though I do agree. SOL Yes I see. Kind of like the scriptures you reject when they dont agree with your theology. God is a God of love. For those who walk in his love through the Spirit have no law. But he is also a God of judgment and wrath for those who reject him. God is not just a big teddy bear that does not demand holiness and righteosness before him. He is the potter and we are the clay. Quote Actually that is what the Catholics did when deciding what to accept and to reject. Were you there? Do you have unambiguous proof of your accusations? Or just more apologetics? Can you prove the text in the Canon were tampered with when there are thousands of copies that agree including the Dead Sea scrolls. Quote I am guided by two things: History, evidence and the work of scholars. The thousands of Canonical manuscripts is plenty of evidence. As far as scholars, it seems you reject 100s of them. So it is a matter of who you choose to believe and not that you have proof that the text is corrupt. As far as history, if it contradicts the Hebrew or GT text then why believe it? Quote The spirit of True Love, True Mercy, True Peace and True Light inside me. Not sometimes love and sometimes hate. Is it hate for God to judge his creation? Can not God do as he wills with that which is his? Would it be Love for God to let evil continue without judgment? Quote This guy is not a scholar but I used his writing because it contained a good example of the evidence of the history of canon formation. I see. Maybe you should get your history from someone besides an agnostic and unbeliever. Try this sight for start… http://www.carm.org/questions/gospels_written.htm Quote You may be just clay in the hands of a potter.  Jehovah's clay. I am a son of the Most High; a Son of Light. Really. So your inference is I am a child of satan the god of this world, Jehovah right? So you dont believe the Hebrew scriptures nor the writings of Paul?… Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? Gen 14:22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the LORD (YHWH), the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth, 2 Sam 22:14 The LORD (YHWH) thundered from heaven, and the most High uttered his voice. Pss 7:17 I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD (YHWH) most high. Pss 21:7 I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD (YHWH) most high. Pss 47:2 For the LORD (YHWH) most high is terrible; he is a great King over all the earth. Ps 83:18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH (YHWH), art the most high over all the earth. Pss 91:9 Because thou hast made the LORD (YHWH), which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation; Pss 92:1 It is a good thing to give thanks unto the LORD (YHWH), and to sing praises unto thy name, O most High:

SOL

You say…

Quote

I used to rely on Christian scholars and apolegists until I kept studying and kept calling their bluff.

So you now believe agnostics and atheistic apologetics?

Quote

They are just not very intectually and spiritually honest.

And the agnostics and atheist are?

Quote

If you really really think that the things Jehovah did in the old testament is good or acceptable (see my post in the who is yhwh thread) then, yes you are a child of darkness.

Here it comes, the good ole if you dont agree with me then you are child of satan.

What do you suppose the Father should do with a wicked person like me SOL?

You could find yourself accusing Jesus of being a child of darkness also, for Jesus spoke often of the Hebrew scriptures including the destruction of Sodom and Gamorah and about Noah and the destruction of all flesh. He even likens those days to his coming again.

Jn 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal l
ife: and they are they which testify of me.

Luke 17:26
And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.

Jesus spoke much of the Hebrew text and in fact claimed it was written about him…

Luke 24:44
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Luke 16:31
And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

So what do you think of these scriptures…

2 Thess 1:6
Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Man with your view it dosnt leave to much left in the scriptures.

I suppose you would throw out the book of revelation also because it reveals the plagues that shall come on the earth before that great and terible day of the Lord.

This also confirms the words of our Lord.

Lk 21:25
And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

Lk 13:26
But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
27 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

Sincerely, what do you think of these?

[Son of Light]

It is not because you agree or disagree with a history or theology point.

I call you a child of darkness not to mock you. In fact I don't call you one. I said “if” you truly truly truly think that many things Jehovah said and did are acceptable and good then you are truly walking in darkness.

examples:

Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. THEIR CHILDREN ALSO SHALL BE DASHED TO PIECES BEFORE THEIR EYES; their houses shall be spoiled, AND THEIR WIVES RAPED.” Isaiah 13:15-16

Murder, rape, and pillage at Jabesh-gilead (Judges 21:10-24 NLT) So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.” Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan. The Israelite assembly sent a peace delegation to the little remnant of Benjamin who were living at the rock of Rimmon. Then the men of Benjamin returned to their homes, and the four hundred women of Jabesh-gilead who were spared were given to them as wives. But there were not enough women for all of them. The people felt sorry for Benjamin because the LORD had left this gap in the tribes of Israel. So the Israelite leaders asked, “How can we find wives for the few who remain, since all the women of the tribe of Benjamin are dead? There must be heirs for the survivors so that an entire tribe of Israel will not be lost forever. But we cannot give them our own daughters in marriage because we have sworn with a solemn oath that anyone who does this will fall under God's curse.” Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem. They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives,
“Go and hide in the vineyards. When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife! And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, 'Please be understanding. Let them have your daughters, for we didn't find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'” So the men of Benjamin did as they were told. They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance. Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them. So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes. Obviously these women were repeatedly raped. These sick bastards killed and raped an entire town and then wanted more virgins, so they hid beside the road to kidnap and rape some more. How can anyone see this as anything but evil.

Murder, rape and pillage of the Midianites (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT) They attacked Midian just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men. All five of the Midianite kings – Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba – died in the battle. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder. They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived. After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, a cross from Jericho. Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. “Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded. “These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves. Clearly Moses and God approves of rape of virgins.

More Murder Rape and Pillage (Deuteronomy 20:10-14) As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you. What kind of God approves of murder, rape, and slavery?

Laws of Rape (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB) If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of lunatic would make a rape victim marry her attacker? Answer: God.

Death to the Rape Victim (Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB) If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife. It is clear that God doesn't give a damn about the rape victim. He is only concerned about the violation of another mans “property”.
David's Punishment – Polygamy, Rape, Baby Killing, and God's
“Forgiveness” (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB)

Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives (plural) while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.' Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Nathan answered David: “The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die.” (The child dies seven days later.) This has got to be one of the sickest quotes of the Bible. God himself brings the completely innocent rapes victims to the rapist. What kind of pathetic loser would do something so evil? And then he kills a child! This is sick, really sick!

Rape of Female Captives (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NLT) Suppose you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God hands them over to you and you take captives. And suppose you see among the captives a beautiful young virgin woman, and you are attracted to her and want to marry her. If this happens, you may take her to your home [against her will], where she must shave her head, cut her fingernails, and change all her clothes [also against her will]. Then she must remain in your home for a full month [kidnapping approved by Jehovah], mourning for her father and mother. After that you may marry her [by force]. But if you marry her and then decide you do not like her, you must let her go free [no longer a virgin and now unable to marry again]. You may not sell her or treat her as a slave, for you have humiliated her. [This humiliation was approved by Jehovah]. Once again God approves of forcible rape.

http://alt.mailarchive.ca/bible/2007-03/4158.html

[NickHassan]

Hi SOL,
You are deceived.
You are so sure you are more righteous than our God.

[Son of Light]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 08 2008,20:19)

Hi SOL, You are deceived. You are so sure you are more righteous than our God.

If your God is the one who did the above things then yes I am far more righteous than him even by his own laws.

I have done none of those things.

You are deceived, Nick.

It boggles the mind that anyone including myself in the past could not see how wicked this god is.

Seriously, Jehovah actually orders mass slaughters of everyone even children except for young virgin girls who are to be kept for rape.

I don't mean to be vulgar here but Jehovah basically order israel to kill all men, women and boys and then “check” young girls for virginity. Nick, these soldiers used their fingers and went about inserting them in young girls. If they were virgins they were spared if not they killed them.

Seriously sick stuff.

[NickHassan]

Hi SOL,
You jump to false conclusions from which you build a false faith.
You are alone.
Wake up.

[Son of Light]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 08 2008,20:38)

Hi SOL, You jump to false conclusions from which you build a false faith. You are alone. Wake up.

I did wake up.

I am set free.

I understand right and wrong now.

I was deceived for a long time. I thought is was God's will for me to be a chauvinist, aggressive, bigot.

I have had the veil lifted that you speak of.

I am far from alone. I actually feel closer to others now that I am not tempted to judge them so harshly. (yes I was even aware of the command not to judge, but christianity is often more about lip service that action).

[Son of Light]

Nick,

what conclusions should i come to when reading of Jehovah ordered rape?

I really want to know. Please don't spout off some not related poetry or wise saying. Answer this question.

[kenrch]

SOL, from the Gospel of Thomas:

27) Jesus said: If you fast not from the world, you will not find the kingdom; if you keep not the Sabbath as Sabbath, you will not see the Father.

According to the Gospel that you said was the MOST Jesus says to keep the Sabbath. I believe that's the forth commandment.

[kenrch]

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

[NickHassan]

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,20:48)

Nick, what conclusions should i come to when reading of Jehovah ordered rape? I really want to know.  Please don't spout off some not related poetry or wise saying.  Answer this question.

Hi SOL,
Read it again without judgement.

[Son of Light]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 09 2008,04:57)

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 08 2008,20:48) Nick, what conclusions should i come to when reading of Jehovah ordered rape? I really want to know.  Please don't spout off some not related poetry or wise saying.  Answer this question. Hi SOL, Read it again without judgement.

I can suspend judgement but I can't suspend my moral compass. And when I read it my moral compass swings south real fast.

[Son of Light]

Quote (kenrch @ Jan. 09 2008,02:12)

SOL, from the Gospel of Thomas: 27) Jesus said: If you fast not from the world, you will not find the kingdom; if you keep not the Sabbath as Sabbath, you will not see the Father. According to the Gospel that you said was the MOST Jesus says to keep the Sabbath.  I believe that's the forth commandment.

Yes the essenses kept the sabbath. They kept the Ten commandments, believing those are from God. The commandments that came later they believed where from bad angels.

Further proof Paul was a scismatic from Jesus and The Way.

[Son of Light]

The Ten Commandments
From The Essene Book of Moses

And Mount Sinai was altogether in smoke because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.

And the Lord came down upon Mount Sinai, on the top of the mount: and the Lord called Moses up to the top of the mount: and Moses went up.

And the Lord called unto Moses out of the mountain, saying, Come unto me, for I would give thee the Law for thy people, which shall be a covenant for the Children of Light.

And Moses went up unto God. And God spake all these words, saying,

I am the Law, thy God, which hath brought thee out from the depths of the bondage of darkness.

Thou shalt have no other Laws before me.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any image of the Law in heaven above or in the earth beneath. I am the invisible Law, without beginning and without end.

Thou shalt not make unto thee false laws, for I am the Law, and the whole Law of all laws. If thou forsake me, thou shalt be visited by disasters for generation upon generation.

If thou keepest my commandments, thou shalt enter the Infinite Garden where stands the Tree of Life in the midst of the Eternal Sea.

Thou shalt not violate the Law. The Law is thy God, who shall not hold thee guiltless.

Honor thy Earthly Mother, that thy days may be long upon the land, and honor thy Heavenly Father, that eternal life be thine in the heavens, for the earth and the heavens are given unto thee by the Law, which is thy God.

Thou shalt greet thy Earthly Mother on the morning of the Sabbath.

Thou shalt greet the Angel of Earth on the second morning.

Thou shalt greet the Angel of Life on the third morning.

Thou shalt greet the Angel of Joy on the fourth morning.

Thou shalt greet the Angel of Sun on the fifth morning.

Thou shalt greet the Angel of Water on the sixth morning.

Thou shalt greet the Angel of Air on the seventh morning.

All these Angels of the Earthly Mother shalt thou greet, and consecrate thyself to them, that thou mayest enter the Infinite Garden where stands the Tree of Life.

Thou shalt worship thy Heavenly Father on the evening of the Sabbath.

Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Eternal Life on the second evening.

Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Work on the third evening.

Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Peace on the fourth evening.

Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Power on the fifth evening,

Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Love on the sixth evening.

Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Wisdom on the seventh evening.

All these Angels of the Heavenly Father shalt thou commune with, that thy soul may bathe in the Fountain of Light, and enter into the Sea of Eternity.

The seventh day is the Sabbath: thou shalt remember it, keep it holy. The Sabbath is the day of the Light of the Law, thy God. In it thou shalt not do any work, but search the Light, the Kingdom of thy God, and all things shall be given unto thee.

For know ye that during six days thou shalt work with the Angels, but the seventh day shalt thou dwell in the Light of thy Lord, who is the holy Law.

Thou shalt not take the life from any living thing. Life comes only from God, who giveth it and taketh it away. Thou shalt not debase Love. It is the sacred gift of thy Heavenly Father.

Thou Shalt not trade thy Soul, the priceless gift of the loving God, for the riches of the world, which are as seeds sown on stony ground, having no root in themselves, and so enduring but for a little while.

Thou shalt not be a false witness of the Law, to use it against thy brother: Only God knoweth the beginning and the ending of all things, for his eye is single, and he is the holy Law.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's possessions. The Law giveth unto thee much greater gifts, even the earth and the heavens, if thou keep the Commandments of the Lord thy God.

And Moses heard the voice of the Lord, and sealed within him the covenant that was between the Lord and the Children of Light.

And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tablets of the Law were in his hand.

And the tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tablets.

And the people knew not what became of Moses, and they gathered themselves together and brake off their golden earrings and made a molten calf. And they worshipped unto the idol, and offered to it burnt offerings.

And they ate and drank and danced before the golden calf, which they had made, and they abandoned themselves to corruption and evil before the Lord.

And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing, and the wickedness of the people: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tablets out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.

And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin, ye have denied thy Creator. I will go up unto the Lord and plead atonement for thy sin.

And Moses returned unto the Lord, and said, Lord, thou hast seen the desecration of thy Holy Law. For thy children lost faith, and worshipped the darkness, and made for themselves a golden calf. Lord, forgive them, for they are blind to the light.

And the Lord said unto Moses, Behold, at the beginning of time was a covenant made between God and man, and the holy flame of the Creator did enter unto him. And he was made the son of

God, and it was given him to guard his inheritance of the firstborn, and to make fruitful the land of his Father and keep it holy. And he who casteth out the Creator from him doth spit upon his birthright, and no more grievous sin doth exist in the eyes of God.

And the Lord spoke, saying, Only the Children of Light can keep the Commandments of the Law. Hear me, for I say thus: the tablets which thou didst break, these shall nevermore be written in the words of men. As thou didst return them to the earth and fire, so shall they live, invisible, in the hearts of those who are able to follow their Law. To thy people of little faith, who did sin against the Creator, even whilst thou stood on holy ground before thy God, -I will give another Law. It shall be a stem law, yea, it shall bind them, for they know not yet the Kingdom of Light.

And Moses hid the invisible Law within his breast, and kept it for a sign to the Children of Light. And God gave unto Moses the written law for the people, and he went down unto them, and spake unto them with a heavy heart.

And Moses said unto the people, these are the laws which thy God hath given thee.

1 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.
3 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
4 Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5 Honor thy father and thy mother.
6 Thou shalt not kill.
7 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8 Thou shalt not steal.
9 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, nor thy neighbor's wife, nor anything that is thy neighbor's.

And there was a day of mourning and atonement for the great sin against the Creator, which did not end. And the broken tablets of the Invisible Law lived hidden in the breast of Moses, until it came to pass that the Children of Light appeared in the desert, and the angels walked the earth

http://www.thenazareneway.com/ten_commandments.htm

[kenrch]

Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 09 2008,06:23)

The Ten Commandments From The Essene Book of Moses And Mount Sinai was altogether in smoke because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And the Lord came down upon Mount Sinai, on the top of the mount: and the Lord called Moses up to the top of the mount: and Moses went up. And the Lord called unto Moses out of the mountain, saying, Come unto me, for I would give thee the Law for thy people, which shall be a covenant for the Children of Light. And Moses went up unto God. And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Law, thy God, which hath brought thee out from the depths of the bondage of darkness. Thou shalt have no other Laws before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any image of the Law in heaven above or in the earth beneath. I am the invisible Law, without beginning and without end. Thou shalt not make unto thee false laws, for I am the Law, and the whole Law of all laws. If thou forsake me, thou shalt be visited by disasters for generation upon generation. If thou keepest my commandments, thou shalt enter the Infinite Garden where stands the Tree of Life in the midst of the Eternal Sea. Thou shalt not violate the Law. The Law is thy God, who shall not hold thee guiltless. Honor thy Earthly Mother, that thy days may be long upon the land, and honor thy Heavenly Father, that eternal life be thine in the heavens, for the earth and the heavens are given unto thee by the Law, which is thy God. Thou shalt greet thy Earthly Mother on the morning of the Sabbath. Thou shalt greet the Angel of Earth on the second morning. Thou shalt greet the Angel of Life on the third morning. Thou shalt greet the Angel of Joy on the fourth morning. Thou shalt greet the Angel of Sun on the fifth morning. Thou shalt greet the Angel of Water on the sixth morning. Thou shalt greet the Angel of Air on the seventh morning. All these Angels of the Earthly Mother shalt thou greet, and consecrate thyself to them, that thou mayest enter the Infinite Garden where stands the Tree of Life. Thou shalt worship thy Heavenly Father on the evening of the Sabbath. Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Eternal Life on the second evening. Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Work on the third evening. Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Peace on the fourth evening. Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Power on the fifth evening, Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Love on the sixth evening. Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Wisdom on the seventh evening. All these Angels of the Heavenly Father shalt thou commune with, that thy soul may bathe in the Fountain of Light, and enter into the Sea of Eternity. The seventh day is the Sabbath: thou shalt remember it, keep it holy. The Sabbath is the day of the Light of the Law, thy God. In it thou shalt not do any work, but search the Light, the Kingdom of thy God, and all things shall be given unto thee. For know ye that during six days thou shalt work with the Angels, but the seventh day shalt thou dwell in the Light of thy Lord, who is the holy Law. Thou shalt not take the life from any living thing. Life comes only from God, who giveth it and taketh it away. Thou shalt not debase Love. It is the sacred gift of thy Heavenly Father. Thou Shalt not trade thy Soul, the priceless gift of the loving God, for the riches of the world, which are as seeds sown on stony ground, having no root in themselves, and so enduring but for a little while. Thou shalt not be a false witness of the Law, to use it against thy brother: Only God knoweth the beginning and the ending of all things, for his eye is single, and he is the holy Law. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's possessions. The Law giveth unto thee much greater gifts, even the earth and the heavens, if thou keep the Commandments of the Lord thy God. And Moses heard the voice of the Lord, and sealed within him the covenant that was between the Lord and the Children of Light. And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tablets of the Law were in his hand. And the tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tablets. And the people knew not what became of Moses, and they gathered themselves together and brake off their golden earrings and made a molten calf. And they worshipped unto the idol, and offered to it burnt offerings. And they ate and drank and danced before the golden calf, which they had made, and they abandoned themselves to corruption and evil before the Lord. And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing, and the wickedness of the people: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tablets out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin, ye have denied thy Creator. I will go up unto the Lord and plead atonement for thy sin. And Moses returned unto the Lord, and said, Lord, thou hast seen the desecration of thy Holy Law. For thy children lost faith, and worshipped the darkness, and made for themselves a golden calf. Lord, forgive them, for they are blind to the light. And the Lord said unto Moses, Behold, at the beginning of time was a covenant made between God and man, and the holy flame of the Creator did enter unto him. And he was made the son of God, and it was given him to guard his inheritance of the firstborn, and to make fruitful the land of his Father and keep it holy. And he who casteth out the Creator from him doth spit upon his birthright, and no more grievous sin doth exist in the eyes of God. And the Lord spoke, saying, Only the Children of Light can keep the Commandments of the Law. Hear me, for I say thus: the tablets which thou didst break, these shall nevermore be written in the words of men. As thou didst return them to the earth and fire, so shall they live, invisible, in the hearts of those who are able to follow their Law. To thy people of little faith, who did sin against the Creator, even whilst thou stood on holy ground before thy God, -I will give another Law. It shall be a stem law, yea, it shall bind them, for they know not yet the Kingdom of Light. And Moses hid the invisible Law within his breast, and kept it for a sign to the Children of Light. And God gave unto Moses the written law for the people, and he went down unto them, and spake unto them with a heavy heart. And Moses said unto the people, these are the laws which thy God hath given thee. 1 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 2 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. 3 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. 4 Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 5 Honor thy father and thy mother. 6 Thou shalt not kill. 7 Thou shalt not commit adultery. 8 Thou shalt not steal. 9 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. 10 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, nor thy neighbor's wife, nor anything that is thy neighbor's. And there was a day of mourning and atonement for the great sin against the Creator, which did not end. And the broken tablets of the Invisible Law lived hidden in the breast of Moses, until it came to pass that the Children of Light appeared in the desert, and the angels walked the earth http://www.thenazareneway.com/ten_commandments.htm

The ten commandments are God's Law.

The law that was nailed to the cross was the law Moses wrote.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

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.

1Co 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

OK so you believe that the bad angels gave Moses the other laws that Jesus nailed to the cross?

[Author]

Posts