- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Nick I would like to thank you again for your reply on my Post the Covenant. I would not say anything else about my Post if Ken would not have come here. I had posted what was meant for Ken by mistake I feel I have to defend the scriptures that I have given. I believe that you agree with me on the covenant and to be born again.
You have a good understanding of the scriptures, I have read a lot of your Posts.
If there are anything that you disagree with, I would like some input from you on that.
Thank you
Mrs.IM4TruthKen How did I attack you.? no I am not here to attack you. I am never mad at Scripture's I wonder who is attacking whom? I am like Pharaoh and God is using me like that? This is really getting sad Ken, now you come on this site on purpose, I did it by mistake ,otherwise I would not be replying here.
Lets see what you said, Yes you give a lot of scriptures, but were you go wrong when you make these remarks like these and I am going to list them now.
We did not have Gods Holy Spirit in the W.W.C. of God
I quote: I adhere to the teachings of men and not of God.
Then I must be very lazy ore I must be very rich if I keep every day holy, I did not say I kept the sabbath in the letter of the Law.
Then the Holy Spirit is not in my heart.
Then you want me to take what the Spirit of God has given you.
Then I don't understand spiritual things.
Then God is using me like He used Pharaoh.
And you say, I am giving you a hard time?
We have been out of the W.W.C.of God for over 12 years. I said this before, but sometimes one has to repeat what one has said. My Husband and I have been studying the bible ever since. Gods Holy Spirit has shown us many more truths, whether you believe it ore not, I am also learning not to get upset when someone disagrees with me. It just saddens me now that some of you have used unnecessary comments that do not belong with Gods Words.. Over and out
Mrs.IM4TruthHi All,
I just wanted to get back to the original article that Nick posted.
I know it was posted to generate discussion, but I haven't really seen any serious discussion yet. I wonder that no-one has pulled this article to pieces, because it is so amazingly full of errors and misunderstandings I find myself divided between frustration and outright laughter!
Let me start with a couple of quick errors:
The author states that, The fable of Astarte tells us, 'that the egg was floating on the water'. And Astarte was born from this egg. This 'egg' however is a Chaldean translation of the Hebrew word 'Arc' and is all about the Arc of Noah. In actual fact Tevah is the Hebrew word, which is translated Ark or Arc, from the Latin Arca. Both Tevah and Arca mean box or chest.
Again, Easter (from Astarte!). As well as the date, 'the eggs' or 'oranges' or 'pine-apples' have nothing to do with the Hebrew 'Pascha' or 'Passover'. Easter comes from the name of Astarte; The Goddess and wife of Baal. Easter actually comes from the Germanic goddess Eostre, as the venerable Bede says, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month, and this is root also for East.
The author is correct in saying that Sunday is named in honour of the sun, but fails to mention that Monday is in honour of the moon, Tuesday for Tyr (Mars), Wednesday for Woden, and so on – so that even if Christians were to worship on Saturday, they would actually be honouring Saturn (according to the author's logic).
But to the real point:
It is only in Greek myth and later that Semiramis is the wife of Ninus (who is often associated with Nimrod, but who the author of the article asserts is another name for Tammuz). Semiramis is a Greek translation of Shammuramat (Sammur-amat), who was the wife of Shamshi-Adad V of Babylon (800BC). After the death of her husband Shammuramat became regent for her son. There are several similarities between herself and the mythical Semiramis, including an inscription at Calah (note this city is also know as Nimrud) dated during her regency, and both being credited with the Babylonian building works, including the famous hanging gardens.
Tammuz is the Hebrew name which derives from the Babylonian vegetation god Damuzi, who was the consort of Inanna (Isthar). There is no Triune god in the ancient myths associated with Damuzi and Inanna – although he was life-death-rebirth god, which could (if one chose) be linked to the death and resurrection of Christ. Tammuz is mentioned by the prophet Ezekiel, then he brought me to the door of the gate of the Lord's house which was toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz.
I could continue pointing out the discrepancies, but it would require doing a bit of research, and I don't feel that it is worth my while. The above really should speak for itself.
Be that as it may, I'm in full agreement with the pre-christian origins of a Triune god – I just don't think bad scholarship should be used to prove a good point.
Nick,
I wrote it down before on a Scripture study I was working on. Here is the gospel of the good news or the kingdom of heaven, that was taught by Messiah Y'shua:
The Gospel Message in a nutshell
Rev 14:6 And2532 I saw1492 another243 angel32 fly4072 in1722 the midst of heaven,3321 having2192 the everlasting166 gospel2098 to preach2097 unto them that dwell2730 on1909 the3588 earth,1093 and2532 to every3956 nation,1484 and2532 kindred,5443 and2532 tongue,1100 and2532 people,2992
Rev 14:7 Saying3004 with1722 a loud3173 voice,5456 Fear5399 God,2316 and2532 give1325 glory1391 to him;846 for3754 the3588 hour5610 of his848 judgment2920 is come:2064 and2532 worship4352 him that made4160 heaven,3772 and2532 earth,1093 and2532 the3588 sea,2281 and2532 the fountains4077 of waters.5204
The gospel message is what Y’shua Messiah (Jesus) proclaimed while He walked the earth. The gospel message will be proclaimed throughout the entire earth by His followers before the Last Great Day. The gospel message contains three main parts.
1.Fear Elohim. Elohim is plural and includes the Father YHWH, the Son Y’shua Messiah who are One in the mighty power of His Spirit. This type of fear is not the fear of death, but rather a great respect for Him, His creation and His ability to give us eternal life in heaven, and on the new earth. These Words are found in the 10 commandments. To deny the Spirit is absolute death. Matt. 10:33 Rom. 1:4, Rom. 8:12-17
2.Worship Him who made the heavens and the earth. These Words are also found in the 4th of His great 10 Commandments. Ex. 20:8-11
3.The hour of His judgment is come. We can say we must be ready for the coming of Messiah as Judge and King at any given moment. To be ready at all times let us keep these 2 great commands in our forethoughts and our hearts at all times.
1.Love YHWH your Elohim with all your heart, and all your mind, and all your soul.Ex.20:3,Deut 6:1-9,Matt. 22:37
2.Love your neighbor as yourself is like the second found in Ex. 20:4-6. This is the whole duty of man in a nutshell. Mark 12:31 , Ecc. 12:13
Luk 4:18 The Spirit4151 of the Lord2962 is upon1909 me,1691 because3739, 1752 he hath anointed5548 me3165 to preach the gospel2097 to the poor;4434 he hath sent649 me3165 to heal2390 the3588 brokenhearted,4937, 2588 to preach2784 deliverance859 to the captives,164 and2532 recovering of sight309 to the blind,5185 to set649 at1722 liberty859 them that are bruised,2352Quote (IM4Truth @ July 20 2007,21:19) Ken How did I attack you.? no I am not here to attack you. I am never mad at Scripture's I wonder who is attacking whom? I am like Pharaoh and God is using me like that? This is really getting sad Ken, now you come on this site on purpose, I did it by mistake ,otherwise I would not be replying here.
Lets see what you said, Yes you give a lot of scriptures, but were you go wrong when you make these remarks like these and I am going to list them now.
We did not have Gods Holy Spirit in the W.W.C. of God
I quote: I adhere to the teachings of men and not of God.
Then I must be very lazy ore I must be very rich if I keep every day holy, I did not say I kept the sabbath in the letter of the Law.
Then the Holy Spirit is not in my heart.
Then you want me to take what the Spirit of God has given you.
Then I don't understand spiritual things.
Then God is using me like He used Pharaoh.
And you say, I am giving you a hard time?
We have been out of the W.W.C.of God for over 12 years. I said this before, but sometimes one has to repeat what one has said. My Husband and I have been studying the bible ever since. Gods Holy Spirit has shown us many more truths, whether you believe it ore not, I am also learning not to get upset when someone disagrees with me. It just saddens me now that some of you have used unnecessary comments that do not belong with Gods Words.. Over and out
Mrs.IM4Truth
First off MIM you told me that you posted in the wrong place anf if I wanted to read it I should go to the Trinity post. Now you tell Nick that it was because I came to this thread like I was chaseing you or something when it was you who told me to come to this thread and read what you said because you made a mistake. If you teach that the Sabbath is for Israel only then that AS I SAID this goes against God and HIS LAW not Moses' law. It's sad that you AS I SAID won't wait on the Spirit but would rather continue to teach your man made doctrine.Like you say You never did answer my question.
Why did Peter say Paul's writings are hard to understand?
You ignor scripture because scripture does not agree with your twisted doctrine. Sorry if the truth hurts! Like I said at the beginning if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen.
As long as you cointinue to teach that the sabbath was JUST for Israel then to can expect to be CORRECTED BY S C R I P T U R E not me MIM Scripture.The best thing as I suggested in the beginning is that you don't post to me any longer. BTW I stand by everything I said no matter how unpleasent it may seem.
Unless NEED BE I won't post to you any longer there is simply no point. If you told me something that wouldn't be so blatantly wrong then I would consider it, pray about it, and WAIT for a witness from the Holy Spirit. BUt GEEISH God's law is for Israel only OR you keep the commandments you want to keep this is totally against Spirit and Truth.
Because I keep the forth commandment can I reject one of the other nine?
Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.
Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.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.
NOW listen up MIM:
Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that ****DO**** his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
You will do what you WANT, so do it, but don't bother me anylonger, OK? If need be you will hear from me!
KEN
Casiphus There are several Books that have proven to be worship of Nimrod and His Wife. It ha been a long time since I read this Book, but the cover says “The Two Babylons or the Papal Worship. It was written by Rev. Alexander Hislop.” Another Book is called “The Secrets of Romanism by Joseph Zachello. “Letters to a Roman Catholic Priest” by H.A.Ironside.
So when I read Nicks article I did not check everything out. On the cover of The Two Babylons it says
Proved to be “The Worship of Nimrod and His Wife”.
There is so much more, but I don't have the time right now. Just wanted to say this much about the subject. Were did you get your information, if I may ask?
Peace Mrs.IM4TruthQuote (Laurel @ July 21 2007,01:23) Nick,
I wrote it down before on a Scripture study I was working on. Here is the gospel of the good news or the kingdom of heaven, that was taught by Messiah Y'shua:
The Gospel Message in a nutshell
Rev 14:6 And2532 I saw1492 another243 angel32 fly4072 in1722 the midst of heaven,3321 having2192 the everlasting166 gospel2098 to preach2097 unto them that dwell2730 on1909 the3588 earth,1093 and2532 to every3956 nation,1484 and2532 kindred,5443 and2532 tongue,1100 and2532 people,2992
Rev 14:7 Saying3004 with1722 a loud3173 voice,5456 Fear5399 God,2316 and2532 give1325 glory1391 to him;846 for3754 the3588 hour5610 of his848 judgment2920 is come:2064 and2532 worship4352 him that made4160 heaven,3772 and2532 earth,1093 and2532 the3588 sea,2281 and2532 the fountains4077 of waters.5204
The gospel message is what Y’shua Messiah (Jesus) proclaimed while He walked the earth. The gospel message will be proclaimed throughout the entire earth by His followers before the Last Great Day. The gospel message contains three main parts.
1.Fear Elohim. Elohim is plural and includes the Father YHWH, the Son Y’shua Messiah who are One in the mighty power of His Spirit. This type of fear is not the fear of death, but rather a great respect for Him, His creation and His ability to give us eternal life in heaven, and on the new earth. These Words are found in the 10 commandments. To deny the Spirit is absolute death. Matt. 10:33 Rom. 1:4, Rom. 8:12-17
2.Worship Him who made the heavens and the earth. These Words are also found in the 4th of His great 10 Commandments. Ex. 20:8-11
3.The hour of His judgment is come. We can say we must be ready for the coming of Messiah as Judge and King at any given moment. To be ready at all times let us keep these 2 great commands in our forethoughts and our hearts at all times.
1.Love YHWH your Elohim with all your heart, and all your mind, and all your soul.Ex.20:3,Deut 6:1-9,Matt. 22:37
2.Love your neighbor as yourself is like the second found in Ex. 20:4-6. This is the whole duty of man in a nutshell. Mark 12:31 , Ecc. 12:13
Luk 4:18 The Spirit4151 of the Lord2962 is upon1909 me,1691 because3739, 1752 he hath anointed5548 me3165 to preach the gospel2097 to the poor;4434 he hath sent649 me3165 to heal2390 the3588 brokenhearted,4937, 2588 to preach2784 deliverance859 to the captives,164 and2532 recovering of sight309 to the blind,5185 to set649 at1722 liberty859 them that are bruised,2352
Hi Laurel,
There is a barrier between God and men. It is not possible for natural men to approach our God in love or in any other way. God sent a mediator to resolve this issue.
For the Jews their relationship with God was through a priest who entered the holy place regularly and the Holy of Holies once a year on their behalf and always with a sacrifice to cover their sin. They were God's chosen people and those outside of that temple as gentiles could not even expect that level of relationship.
Now Christ as eternal priest has gone in once on behalf of men offering his own body as sacrifice and tearing the temple curtain of that flesh to allow free access for those in him to God.
Men need to listen to him and obey he whom God has sent to bring us into His family so we can come into His loving presence.
We cannot bypass the mediator .Nick,
I can't even bear to read your post since I did read the first sentence and see that you are trying once again to contradict Scripture. The first thing I posted was qoutes fromRevelations. Tell Elohim that you do not agree with Him, don't tell me. I didn't write the Book. Revelations 14:7 IS the gospel and Rev. 14:6 says it is.My post ends with a quote from Messiah. End of Discussion.
One can not worship Him who made the heavens and the earth without following the Messiah. For Elohim esteems the Son. The Son esteems the Father. If you knew Scripture you would see that YHWH taught us all about His Son in His Feasts (appointed times).
Hi IM,
Quote Were did you get your information, if I may ask? My undergraduate degree was in ancient history, so I was mostly drawing from memory – especially as the Ninus and Semiramis legend had fascinated me at the time. This is a Greek legend, but (as with many Greek legends) it draws on bits and pieces of Assyrian and Babylonian myth.
I have read Hislop's argument, and it is appalling scholarship to say the least. Hislop (and the author of the article that Nick posted) displays an ignorance of linguistics, using phonetics – particularly similar sounding words – to propose associations (such as the ones I mentioned, and the IHS Egyptian Trinity claim), not understanding that one must trace the root of a word to it's meaning in the tradional language, rather than (as Hislop does) linking similar sounding words across vastly different languages. It reminds me of a first year student who thought that the Egyptian god, Aman (later Amun-re), could have been the origin of the Hebrew phrase Amen. It is almost childish in it's ignorance.
Quote On the cover of The Two Babylons it says
Proved to be “The Worship of Nimrod and His Wife”I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but writing proved on the cover of a book doesn't actually mean that the claim is true. The Da Vinci Code makes the claim that, All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate, yet again, anyone with a modicum of understanding of linguistics; Church History; Greek, Roman, or Eastern myth and culture, would be able to point out numerous fundamental errors in the claims made by this book – though it was a page-turner!
I'm not saying that Hislop's basic claim – that many of the Catholic Church's traditions pre-date the Christian era – is inaccurate, but rather that his scholarship is shoddy, bigotted to the point of racism, and in many cases entirely fabricated. An interesting read in this regard is The Babylon Connection by Ralph Woodrow. Woodrow's first book, Babylon Mystery Religion, was based almost entirely on Hislop's book, Woodrow just expanded the themes. Woodrow was challenged to test the claims Hislop made, and surprisingly accepted this challenge. He was finally forced to own:
Quote As I did this, it became clear-Hislop's “history” was often only mythology… an arbitrary piecing together of ancient myths can not provide a sound basis for history. Take enough tribes, enough tales, enough time, jump from one time to another, from one country to another, pick and choose similarities-why anything could be “proved”! The Babylon Connection is not without it's faults – Woodrow concludes that accusations of paganism [sic]* in Church tradition are unfounded, which is not true, however it does research Hislop's claims thoroughly.
I hope you won't take offense at my comments. It is understandable that when we read a scholarly book, we should be able to trust that it's claims are well founded – especially one such as Hislop, where there are references to other ancient sources. There is enough evidence to argue conclusively against the Christian origins of the trinity doctrine, Mary worship, praying to saints, Lent, Christ-mass, and so on, without recourse to deception.
————————
* It is ananchronistic to speak of pre-Christian traditions as pagan – this term comes from the Latin paganus, meaning an old country dweller, or rustic, and came to be used by townsfolk (who were at least nominally Roman Catholic) to refer to rustic country-folk that didn't adopt the civilised culture of Christianity.Interestingly, this same kind of attitude seems to have predominated ancient Hebrew culture, though in reverse – where the civilised city-dwelling polytheists scorned the antiquated pastoral monotheism of the nazirites and prophets, such as Elijah and Elisha.
Hello Casiphus Thank you for your reply, no I don't take offence, You have the education in Ancient History, I don't. I just read some Books and at the time, I was only a babe in Christ. But I do believe we have Books on Ancient History in our Library. I will study them. I appreciate your input on the subject and I will get back with you after I read some of that time.
Peace Mr.IM4TruthQuote (Laurel @ July 10 2007,17:08) The article you posted is well known to people in the east. Even the Jewish calendar has the fourth month named Tammuz, maybe it was a memorial to Tammuz or maybe YHWH Himself put it there so the Jews wouldn't forget that they also worshipped the Sun. It is a child sacrificial religion.
Well is Christianity not based on a “Child sacrificial system”… you believe that God put to death his only Son as a sin sacrifice for your and humanities sin… how can this be when He condemned human sacrifice as an abomination before him. Think about it. How can God justify something he has very clearly condemned!!!Quote (Artizan007 @ July 27 2007,07:16) Quote (Laurel @ July 10 2007,17:08) The article you posted is well known to people in the east. Even the Jewish calendar has the fourth month named Tammuz, maybe it was a memorial to Tammuz or maybe YHWH Himself put it there so the Jews wouldn't forget that they also worshipped the Sun. It is a child sacrificial religion.
Well is Christianity not based on a “Child sacrificial system”… you believe that God put to death his only Son as a sin sacrifice for your and humanities sin… how can this be when He condemned human sacrifice as an abomination before him. Think about it. How can God justify something he has very clearly condemned!!!
Well, for one, Yeshua was not a “child”, he was an adult. Next, as far as sacrificing humans goes, here are the verses:Lev 20:2 “You shall also say to the sons of Israel: 'Any man from the sons of Israel or from the aliens sojourning in Israel who gives any of his offspring to Molech, shall surely be put to death; the people of the land shall stone him with stones.
Lev 20:3 'I will also set My face against that man and will cut him off from among his people, because he has given some of his offspring to Molech, so as to defile My sanctuary and to profane My holy name.
————————————————–
Lev 18:21 'You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the LORD.So was Yeshua given to Molech? Perhaps you can give us some other scriptural reference to back up your assertions because i do not really know any others at this time.
Hi Kejonn, sure Jesus was not given to Molech, but the principle of human sacrifice is the same is it not. I dont care who the sacrifice goes to, you can't condemn something on the one hand then condone it on the other and still be considered fair and just.
If I told you not to speed and you speed – you are wrong in my eyes… whether you are on a motorbike or in a car… however if I tell you not to speed and I punish you for doing so, and then I speed whether in a motorbike or a car – I go against the very principle I lay down… and I am wrong – So child or adult, it was still a human sacrifice – offspring does not necessarily mean child… it could mean young or older for all we know. Isaac was not a child when he was offered… a test of obedience and STOPPED by God who provided the Ram… showing Abraham what was not acceptable in God's site. Human sacrifice. God provided the Ram, not a lamb but the way to show Abraham the correct way.
Hi A7,
Why would you judge the motives and actions of God?
No commandments apply to the one who gave them.
He is to be feared and not judged.Rom 9
“12It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20Nay 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?
21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
25As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
26And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
27Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
28For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. “
Hi A7,
Quote Hi Kejonn, sure Jesus was not given to Molech, but the principle of human sacrifice is the same is it not. I dont care who the sacrifice goes to, you can't condemn something on the one hand then condone it on the other and still be considered fair and just.
I think that the difference between these two examples is that Christ allowed himself to be crucified, and that the hands that dealt his death did not do so in offering to a divine being. It is not really a human sacrifice in the formal sense of the word, but a symbol of eternal sacrifice – a once for all time willing sacrifice.The other difference is that Christ's sacrifice was an atonement sacrifice (a cleansing sacrifice), whereas a Molech sacrifice was a favour sacrifice (a kind of bribe for greater reward). I think that as an extension of Hebrew theology, Christ's sacrifice could be seen to symbolise atonement, thanksgiving, conciliation, but not the procurement of favour.
Quote (Casiphus @ July 28 2007,05:34) Hi A7, Quote Hi Kejonn, sure Jesus was not given to Molech, but the principle of human sacrifice is the same is it not. I dont care who the sacrifice goes to, you can't condemn something on the one hand then condone it on the other and still be considered fair and just.
I think that the difference between these two examples is that Christ allowed himself to be crucified, and that the hands that dealt his death did not do so in offering to a divine being. It is not really a human sacrifice in the formal sense of the word, but a symbol of eternal sacrifice – a once for all time willing sacrifice.The other difference is that Christ's sacrifice was an atonement sacrifice (a cleansing sacrifice), whereas a Molech sacrifice was a favour sacrifice (a kind of bribe for greater reward). I think that as an extension of Hebrew theology, Christ's sacrifice could be seen to symbolise atonement, thanksgiving, conciliation, but not the procurement of favour.
I agree. And we shouldn't fail to see the implication of Abraham and Isaac. Yes, God prevented Abraham from sacrificing his son, but we see in that story that a man was told to do so. Yeshua was the lamb that was provided, because the animal sacrificed in Isaac's place that day was an adult sheep, a ram, not a lamb. Yeshua was and is the Lamb of God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
