Jump to content

choir loft

Advanced Member
  • Content Count

    327
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

123 Neutral

5 Followers

About choir loft

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    rjp34655@gmail.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Florida
  • Interests
    Messianic Judaism, history, travel, Old Testament, theological aberrations of the Christian church

Recent Profile Visitors

491 profile views
  1. A new generation has arisen in the land that knows not God. Neither do they uphold the LAW of God. Not knowing the LAW and not being taught it, many Christians AS WELL AS atheistic young people, embrace an ungodly form of licentiousness they call grace - or simply do as they please. BE ADVISED: This new attitude is called "NO HIGHER LAW." Have you heard of it? Ask around. I didn't invent the thing. The 'no higher law' attitude is particularly embraced by young people of high school age as well as young adults. Like all false philosophy it masks itself as popular truth. In reality its a restatement of the original lie spoken by the tempter in the garden of Eden in Genesis chapter 3 verse 5. "God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." I'm informed the Hebrew idiom may more accurately be translated as "you shall be gods unto yourselves" instead of "like God, knowing good and evil." Either way, this is an expression of the adoption of human philosophy to justify deliberate disobedience to and rejection of God's LAW. It is the basic philosophy behind school shootings, street violence and every sort of flagrant licentiousness by young and old. Nothing has changed since the tempter's words in the garden of Eden - nothing in all these years. Man is still seeking ways to justify his SIN. I submit to the reader that the forbidden fruit God warned us not to eat is the newly refurbished philosophy of NO HIGHER LAW. We have been given the LAW for a reason. that's me, hollering from the choir loft....
  2. Approximately 30% of Jews who lived during Jesus' time acknowledged Him as messiah - the anointed Son of God. This is no small number by any count one wishes to undertake. Jesus used miracles to prove He is God. There was no discussion about the trinity in the gospels or any of the letters of the New Testament. If I am mistaken, please quote chapter and verses where this is discussed in detail. In point of fact there is only one incident where anything close to it appears - the account of the baptism of Jesus by John the immerser (where Jesus was officially anointed by God and man). Trinity as a doctrine was initially discussed by the church during the first council of Nicaea (325AD) and formally adopted in its present form in the council of Constantinople (381AD). It was there that it became known as the Nicene Creed. What is not generally known is that these council meetings were called by paid for and personally supervised by the Roman emperor Constantine. Constantine insinuated his own peculiar form of pagan ideology into the doctrine of the trinity. However, in the original Hebrew it conveys a somewhat different impression. Shema Yisrael (Hear O Israel) Adonai Eloihenu (The Lord your God) Adonai Echad (The Lord is One) - Deuteronomy 6:4 I call the reader's attention to the Hebrew word 'echad'. It's literal translation is 'one', but its contextual meaning is somewhat different. The Hebrew word Yachid also means one. Echad and Yachid carry different values for the word one. Yachid is the meaning of an absolute one. For example, the earth has One sun in the sky. Humanity lives on One planet - the earth. Yachid refers to a single item or count. Echad is the meaning of a union of items. The United States, for example, is one country - a union of fifty separate parts or states. But echad is more than a political boundary line. Its more than a corporate merger or a ball club. It describes a personality that is unified in thought word and deed. God is echad. * * * In ancient times every Jewish teacher (rabbi) hosted a group of followers known as students or talmidim. Each of these student groups emulated their intellectual and moral leader. Today these assemblies are called Bible study groups. Some things never change. One of the best examples of this situation was in the gospel account of the talmidim of Yeshua (students of Jesus) asking Him how they ought to pray. Every rabbi taught his talmidim a different way to pray. That's why the gospel account of Jesus' answer is commonly known as the Lord's Prayer (as opposed to rabbi so-and-so's prayer). The Greeks employed a similar method of education to transmit knowledge from one generation to another. The talmidim of Yeshuah (students of Jesus) were mostly Jews, even in Antioch. In every account in the gospels and epistles they worshipped in synagogues. It was in Antioch they were renamed Christians by gentiles (goyim) for several reasons. Mostly it was because the believers in messiah, or Messianics as they are called today, had become noticed as a particularly unique religious group - a mixture of both Jews and gentiles. Previously these two groups did not fellowship together - AT ALL. The name Christian was affixed to the group for two reasons. First, because of the latinized translation of ha-mashiach (messiah or christ) - as in Christ believers instead of messiah believers. The word catholic was first associated with these persons by Ignatious of Antioch (same town, btw) in a letter to believers in a different city. The word catholic was originally associated with the Greek phrase "on the whole" as a reference, I suppose, to the union of Jews and gentiles as students (talmidim) of Jesus (the Latinized form of the Hebrew name Yeshua). At about the same time, the original teachings of Jesus began to be diluted as a result of gentile pagan influences. As time went on Jews were either excluded altogether, forced to follow a newly devised litany of paganized worship and ideology or eventually murdered out of hand. Replacement theology, or supersessionism as it has come to be known, eventually replaced the whole of the Old Testament with pagan theology. It is worthy of mention here that Supersessionism is not strictly an ideology of the Roman Catholic church. It has been fanatically embraced by protestants as well - using the principles of Greek philosophy to fill in the blanks and illogical spaces in its ideology with pseudo-intellectual rationale. Bottom line differences between Jews and Christian religion is tradition vs. doctrine. Jews DO their religion. It's known as tradition and involves a lot of rules and ceremonies, none of which may have anything at all to do with God. It is therefore entirely possible and appropriate for a Jew to be an atheist - as long as tradition is observed. Christians BELIEVE their religion. It may or may not have anything to do with how things were done in the past or even whether actions are legal or sinful. Christians BELIEVE, for example, they can put their hands on any filthy thing they desire and be exonerated for it. In neither case does God have any sort of personal input in the lives and acts of man. Until Jesus stepped onto the world stage and demonstrated something different. He demonstrated that God can be and most certainly is intimately involved in every thing mankind does at every level mankind experiences. He demonstrated that God is above the human experience at the same time He lives it. He demonstrated that it is possible for us to become like Him - even though its the last thing on anyone's mind. that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
  3. A very good statement concerning American political progressivism and the odd corrupted form of institutional religious self-justification adopted by Christendom. Many would argue the truth of what you've written here so as to suppress it or obfuscate it or simply to avoid it. I don't understand the false identification with Jews you've mentioned. It's been my experience that Christians today give lip service to respect of Jewish brethren, but secretly harbor an extreme covert dislike of them as well as an outward rejection of Jewish LAW. Jesus said He didn't come to abolish the LAW, but to fulfill it. (Matthew 5:17) Not knowing the LAW and not being taught it, many Christians embrace an ungodly form of licentiousness they call grace. A new generation has arisen in the land that knows not God. Neither do they uphold the LAW or enjoy its glory. This new attitude is called "NO HIGHER LAW." The 'no higher law' or NHL attitude is embraced by young people of high school age as well as young adults. Like all false philosophy it masks itself as popular truth. In reality its a restatement of the original lie spoken by the tempter in the garden of Eden in Genesis chapter 3 verse 5. "God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." I'm informed the Hebrew idiom may more accurately be translated as "you shall be gods unto yourselves" instead of "like Gold, knowing good and evil." Either way, this is an expression of the adoption of human philosophy to justify deliberate disobedience to and rejection of God's LAW. Nothing has changed in all these years. Man is still seeking ways to justify his SIN. I submit to the reader that the forbidden fruit God warned us not to eat is philosophy. We are given the LAW for a reason. that's me, hollering from the choir loft....
  4. def: Truth is that which is consistent with what is. def: Philosophy is a system of thought. It isn't necessarily based upon truth. Jesus said He was the Truth. He didn't say He was good philosophy. Philosophy is by its nature changeable and defined by persons or societies as they choose. God's LAW doesn't change and cannot be reinterpreted by man. 'Good philosophy' is that which is of an advantage to justify actions of an individual or society. A good philosophy may thus justify my killing of you, rape of your wife, stealing of your worldly goods, burning your house to the ground and blaming you for the whole episode. There is no such thing as good philosophy. In a Communist society a good philosophy places the state in the position of God. It rejects the existence and worship of God and His LAW. In a fascist society a good philosophy embraces perpetual war so as to enlarge financial interests and global hegemony. Appeals to God are employed only as a basis of propaganda. For example "God is with us" was a slogan used by Nazi Germany. A similar slogan, "God bless America", is used by Americans to justify greed and SIN. Both use God as a propaganda technique to justify government policies of international aggression as well as personal aggrandizement. The advantage of God's LAW over philosophy, be it personal or social, is that it is uniform for all people at all times and in all places. It does not change and is not subject to interpretation of anyone or any group. We don't decide what is true or not. It is for us to seek it and embrace it - not redefine it for our own purposes and pleasure. Your point of view is changeable philosophy. You've even admitted to it. In doing so you oppose the will of God. Be advised you are walking on very thin ice. Apart from the LAW, no one can be saved. Philosophy has never saved anyone. THOSE WHO DO NOT LEARN FROM HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT. - George Santayana Philosophy is the keystone in the arch of lies and SIN. It holds all false notions together - for a season. that's me, hollering from the choir loft..... PS God appeared to the Arabs and said He had a LAW for them. "What is this LAW," they asked. "You shall not kill," God said. "We can't abide by such a LAW," the Arabs answered. "Take your LAW elsewhere." God then appeared to the Americans and offered them a LAW. The American repeated the same question and asked what LAW God offered to them. "You shall not covet your neighbors' goods," the Lord answered. "We cannot abide by such a LAW," the Americans replied. "Go away from us." Lastly God appeared to the Jews and offered them the LAW. "How much is this LAW," the Jews asked. "Nothing," God said. "The LAW is free." "Good," the Jews answered. "Give us ten."
  5. You are deliberately misunderstanding my meaning here. WHO defines 'good' or 'bad' philosophy? You? Me? Society? The common practice today, especially among the young generation, is to do that which appeals to and fulfills their appetites and passions. If they are intelligent enough to make a leap beyond themselves, then they believe that society is justified in establishing the philosophy by which we are all meant to live. (*) The problem with making society or self one's god is that such a decision leads to despotism and murder. The foundation of philosophy is changeable and subject to corruption. The LAW of God is not. I find it interesting that you deem the LAW of the Most High to be an insufficient guide to one's personal life or that of society. The philosophical attitude of today is 'what society determines to be good is that which is good'. Mark my words here - such a social attitude will lead to further erosion of political liberty and the destruction of guarantees of personal safety. If social philosophy determines it's good to kill Jews, then they die by the millions. If society decides it's ok to murder innocent children, Kurds, or Croats, or Protestants or Catholics, or Native American Indians then war is made upon them. This is history and it proves philosophy is not only corruptible but is murderous in the extreme. The philosophy of today calls mass murders "ethnic cleansing" not genocide. There is no difference in the meaning of the words except one of philosophy. Ethnic cleansing doesn't sound as abhorrent as genocide. The LAW is stable and good because it depends upon the unchangeable nature of God as applied to nations and persons. My use of the term post modernism is a reference to the common REJECTION of rationality as historically employed to interpret scripture as well as all other aspects of society. The current attitude of clerics politicians and captains of industry today is to reject grounded traditional standards of behavior and responsibility. The result of this philosophical aberration is what is generally referred to as a CULTURE WAR. It has nothing to do with illegal aliens and everything to do with perverse thinking - good becomes bad, bad becomes good, man becomes woman and woman becomes god. Philosophy lies at the root of every successful war upon an established productive and respected civilization. We are at war today because we've abandoned the root and standard of God's honest unchangeable LAW. Who decides what is good or bad about philosophy? That answer is as changeable as philosophy itself. You seem to prefer this sort of situation. Every despot in history would agree with you. that's me, hollering from the choir loft... (*) ASK a high school student if society is justified in its behavior. They will tell you it is. (That's what they've told me.) If society deems it proper to murder babies in their mother's womb, then it is good. If society decides war is to be made upon an innocent foreign nation so as to steal their resources, then it is good. If Christians and Jews are to be labeled as insane people filled with hate speech, then it is justifiably mandated to act against them. The fruit of philosophy, rather than LAW, is murder lies and thievery (all the qualities of satan, btw).
  6. I can do nothing here except agree heartily with every word you wrote. You are a rare bird, sir and I imagine you ruffle a lot of Christian feathers from time to time. Keep doing it. It's good for them. Has anyone here been to a Jewish worship service recently? Specifically I refer to a Reform congregation. Sermons can be as devoid of reference to scripture as any apostate faux-Christian franchise. Perhaps I should amend that accusation to say MOST Christian franchises. There are two types of sermon; topical and textual. A textual sermon is like a seminary lecture because it steps through a passage of scripture one line at a time - never departing from the verses except to provide examples to explain them. Textual sermons are seldom presented because they are deemed to be too exhaustive for the mentality of the average congregation. A topical sermon is most common. Its subject is usually some pc subject with scripture used to support the speaker's argument in the same way he or she might employ an anecdote to lighten the mood. Organized religion, especially the Christian type is mostly a commercialized activity - like Christmas and Easter. Congregations are deliberately manipulated so as to provide financial support for the dog and pony show that entertains them on Sunday morning. I'm not kidding about manipulation. Courses are offered to educate religious leaders in how to manipulate their members. Apologetic speakers are very popular these days. It might surprise some to learn that apologetic speakers are the cream of the crop when it comes to philosophical manipulation of the faithful. Apologetics is an intellectual chess game and many of the fans of a debate contest between an apologist and an atheist thrill at the moves of each player. It's all in the moves - JUST LIKE a chess game, but just like a chess game few get saved in the process. It's all about crushing your opponent with a good argument, not saving him. Finally, I've actually met people who were shocked down to their shoes when they were told Jesus is a Jew. Never heard about His ancestry. What if the two witnesses in Revelation are references to Jewish evangelists? There's another shocking suggestion. Good church folk do not like Jews or references to Jewish LAW. (*) that's me, hollering from the choir loft.... (*) I wear a lapel pin on my sport coat. It's not an American flag. It's the flag of Israel. When it comes time during a church service to go around and shake one another's hand I get a lot of disapproving gazes from folks who'd rather not give me a second glance. I've thought about wearing my kippah (yamaka) to church, but that might be too aggravating for them.
  7. I don't quite understand your meaning or intent. Which orthodoxy are you referring to? The Russian version? The Greek version? The main comparison between Christian and Jewish thinking is DOING vs. BELIEVING. Jewish tradition involves doing or acting upon the tenants of the religion. Judaism is replete with all sorts of customs and rules and actions. These ACTS are so involved as to allow exclusion of God in some cases. Judaism isn't a set piece religion. There are reform Jews and there are orthodox Jews and there are atheistic Jews and all manner of types in between. This is possible because Judaism is about DOING. Christian tradition is about believing. One cannot join a church without a passing acceptance of the church creed or statement of faith. There are many. Believing does not normally require acting. All that is really required is a regular donation to the local venue so as to sustain its existence. The result is that people attend a church, agree in principle to a standard set of ideas, pay an admission tax, and then live their lives any way they please after they hit the parking lot. The result is a lot of differing doctrines, which in principle mean exactly nothing. The rapture tribulation and millennium issues are a good example. People argue endlessly about these subjects as if the rising and setting of the sun depended upon embracing a particular interpretation. In point of fact it has nothing at all to do with acting like a disciple of Christ, or anything efficacious regarding sanctification or salvation. It's an empty belief, nothing more. The traditions and philosophy of the Jewish Pharisees didn't die when the legions of Titus pulled down Herod's temple in Jerusalem. It affects much of Christian thought to this day. Do you believe in angels? You are a pharisee. Do you believe in the resurrection? You are a pharisee. Do you believe that tithing is required of God? Then you are a pharisee. The bag of sand you refer to is full of meaningless philosophical ideas that change with the wind. They allow men to do as they please and justify themselves as being religious. God is no fool and doesn't buy this bag of sand for a moment. One cannot compare Jewish tradition with Christian doctrines. Its worse than comparing apples to oranges because neither tradition nor doctrine will save anybody. Apples and oranges make for a healthy diet. Finally I wish to ask WHICH Messianic faiths you are referring to. The movement has become gradually more popular in the years following June 6, 1967 but not necessarily unified in thought word and deed. Even the RC church has a messianic spin off. Christians do not consider Messianics to be Christian and Jews do not consider them to be Jewish. It's a group that exists in the twilight zone between major religions. The reader should consider this when exploring the veracity of a local Messianic congregation. I consider myself to be a Messianic Jew, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize that there are differences between us. Therefore the issues I consider to be of major concern are those of changeable philosophy versus the immutable LAW of the Torah and the lessons of the Tanakh. One is guided by unchangeable directions and diverted into destruction by changeable philosophy. History of empires bears witness to this truth. Those that do not learn the lesson of history are doomed to repeat it. that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
  8. Who defines "bad philosophy" or "good philosophy"? One man's meat is another man's poison. The good of the society is not always good. It changes according to social opinion. The whole point of my post on philosophy is that its changeable according to individual perception. That is the meaning of subjectivism. You agreed with this and said it was a good thing - except it isn't. When a man decides to kill another for his money the act is good for the killer. Not so good for his victim. When a society decides to wage war upon another, rationale is employed to justify it one way or another. War is good for the winner but not good for the loser. When a society decides that religion is poison and that god is imaginary, such thought and activity justifies the changeable nature of SIN. The first thing satan did in the garden of Eden was to call God a liar. (Genesis 3) That is exactly what post-modern philosophy accomplishes. My point is that a higher standard must be employed. This higher standard is and of a right ought to be impervious to individual or social opinion and change. It should be objective, as for example the Ten Commandments. Your post is very busy justifying the gelatin substance of philosophy. Philosophy is fine for discussions over a pitcher of beer. As the beverage affects the speakers at table they all become wiser in their own eyes - even though their eyes cannot see as clearly as before. Philosophy in church is killing Christendom - a point I've made numerous times before. A NEW GENERATION HAS ARISEN THAT KNOWS NOT GOD. This new generation is only interested in self gratification. They are not interested in anything which remotely suggests a standard of behavior or - God forbid - objective thinking. God is rejected completely as is morality. Both are four letter words in their mind because they require behavior and attitudes which disagree with their appetites and passions. In the words of the Bile they are carnal. Philosophy lies at the root of group manipulation, which is why it is used so often in church and repressive government. It is the enemy of righteousness and decency. It is the friend of the criminal, the despot and the devil. * * * * I wish to reiterate the protestant hypocrisy of hatred of Jews and Jewish LAW. Once upon a time long ago, all protestants gave lip service to respect for Jews as persons and Israel as their homeland. Today the reverse is true. All major protestant denominations except for Baptists have made public statements denying Israel the right to exist. (BDS movement) Each of these organizations is actively involved in supporting the enemies of Israel. Their names are registered as members of the opposition. Those which are considered to be evangelical mouth support of Jews and Israel, but in private they believe Jews are disgusting and Jewish LAW is obsolete. Any statement otherwise refuses to acknowledge fact. I have personally seen the expression of ignorant evangelicals change to one of disgust when something of Jewish nature is put before them. I have personally read and heard statements by ignorant fundamentalists that believe the LAW has been replaced by grace and that it is abolished. Jesus said He didn't come to abolish the LAW (Matt 5:17), but these folk who claim to love the King of the Jews ignore His words. Granted there are isolated individuals who don't hold a nameless grudge against Jews or Israel, but they are a rare bird. Most of the time these same persons continue to support churches that are openly opposed to Israel. This too is hypocrisy and double-mindedness. My posting is and continues to be one of rejecting philosophy as a form of interpreting scripture. The LAW is almost never employed in churches today to do so. And that is the primary reason so many are leaving churches. People who think - do not appreciate empty words. People who don't think - won't be bothered with empty entertainment. that's me, hollering from the choir loft.....
  9. Thank you for your kind evaluation of my post. I differ on the efficacy of philosophy, Greek or otherwise. Why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ but not do what I say? I will show you what he is like who comes to Me and hears My words and acts on them: He is like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid his foundation on the rock. When the flood came, the torrent crashed against that house but could not shake it, because it was well built. But the one who hears My words and does not act on them is like a man who built his house on ground without a foundation. The torrent crashed against that house, and immediately it fell—and great was its destruction.” - Luke 6:46-49 The Roman Catholic church parses out the italicized portion of the quote above to justify their doctrine of apostolic succession. But Christ didn't teach in bits and pieces and didn't intend his thoughts to be employed solely by an institution. He meant them for all. At issue is the trend of the church to abandon Jewish tradition theology and scripture from the earliest years of Christianity. Severed from its Jewish roots, the church naturally gravitated toward the popular secular style of philosophical interpretation - specifically the Greek type. There are two problems with using Greek philosophy to interpret scripture. One is the tendency to dilute Biblical thought by references to pagan ideology (Easter, Christmas & the concept of hell). The other is the temporary subjective changeable nature of philosophy itself. The shifting sands, or foundation, Jesus spoke of is subjective philosophy. (*) Jewish tradition is glacial with rare application of changes. Jewish ideology is mostly fixed. It's objective in nature, meaning that its' basic presupposition is based upon the unchangeable nature of the LAW. The rock Jesus spoke of is objective LAW. Philosophy, as a subjective tool used by the church to interpret the gospel, changes every ten to fifteen years. It does so in reaction to changes in secular society, which occur every ten to fifteen years. It takes approximately five years for church theologians to realize a change in secular philosophy and to compose a religious philosophy to oppose it. The term used to describe this process is, "making the gospel relevant." I'm guessing the reader has heard or read this expression countless times. It implies a constant intellectual chess game of move and counter move on the part of theologians to react to changes in secular attitudes. One of the best chessmen today is a fellow by the name of Ravi Zacharias. I confess to enjoying his intellectual banter immensely. But with all his remarkable skill and extensive education in philosophy, Mr. Zacharias has pinned his arguments upon the shifting sands of philosophy to interpret the gospel to the secular world and entertain the church. When the years roll by in a man's life it becomes apparent to many that the ways of life depend on unchangeable matters. Honesty, thrift, truth, peace, loyalty and humility toward God are objective unchangeable qualities that build a successful life. These things do not change. They are the rock upon which one can build one's house. Lies, cruelty, corruption, betrayal and violence are changeable subjective qualities secular society admires and in many cases employ to their destruction. It is certainly a large part of secular entertainment. Philosophy is at the heart of it all whether it is expressed over a pitcher of beer at a local tavern or from a church pulpit. It is the same chameleon view of life that leads to the destruction of one's house - one's life. For example: The United States is currently enduring a culture war, which can be expressed in terms of a conflict between objective traditional values and subjective focus on individual failure, greed, political manipulation and overt sin. Unfortunately, Christianity hates anything that smells of Jewish LAW and has taught its adherents to despise and reject it. The ROCK, is therefore rejected even by the church. SHIFTING SANDS are given as an alternative. The words of Jesus remain as a lighthouse guide in the storm of life. The LAW is not to be ignored. It remains forever as a standard for living a solid life before God and man. that's me, hollering from the choir loft... (*) definitions from Merriam-Webster dictionary; Subjective - modified or affected by personal views, experience, or background Objective - expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
  10. You may find the book THE FIRE THAT CONSUMES by Edward William Fudge to be quite interesting. I recommend it to you. Edward Fudge is also the subject of a biographical movie called HELL AND MR. FUDGE. The book is 210 pages and pours a lot of cold water on the myth of hell. The movie describes the hell Mr. Fudge experienced from the protestant church as he developed his research from the entire context of the Bible. To this day, despite Biblical evidence to the contrary, protestants refuse to let go of the Greek myth they believe to be gospel. The RCC is flirting with abandonment of the doctrine, but hasn't come out with any bull on the subject (Papal bull or official pronouncement, that is.) As for me, I believe the traditional Christian idea of hell as an eternal torment of sinners is indeed bovine excrement. It stinks on many levels. God kills (and doesn't even enjoy the act). God doesn't torture. Catholics have loved to torture, as evidenced by the inquisition. Protestants love to torture as evidenced by the holocaust. Neither consult the Bible because it cannot justify their demonic persuasion. that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
  11. I wrote that it's meaningless because the term isn't used in common vernacular today. The Bible uses it to describe the origins of human children as well as the Son of God. The church uses it as a sort of catch-all phrase to stun its congregation into intellectual numbness and justify the priest or minister's position as chief spiritual know-it-all. Begotten, regardless of the parent, simply means 'child of'. Jesus simply called his progenitor FATHER. As adopted children, we are invited to do the same. that's me, hollering from the choir loft....
  12. You touch on many subjects, most of which I agree with. I'm going to respond to just one. Jesus didn't "go to gehenna" to liberate captives there while He was in the tomb. This is a fabrication invented by the church. It is not Biblical. 1 Peter 3:19 says only that He 'made proclamation' to the imprisoned spirits AFTER BEING MADE ALIVE. (Translations vary on this point.) The simple truth is that we do not know what Jesus was doing while He was dead. One may be close to the truth, however, if one assumes Jesus slept in sheol. According to the Old Testament, those that died would sleep in a place called SHEOL. Sheol was the place of the sleeping dead. Little or nothing is said of this place in the OT. The expanded version of what happened after one dies happens in the New Testament. Sheol was a simple term and description, nothing more and nothing less. Use of the word gehenna is a translational aberration generally interpreted to mean hell or the abode of the dead. Again, this is a Greek myth based upon ancient Egyptian religion. It is not Biblical and is often employed by publishers of Bibles to push their agenda. Gehenna was in fact a city dump outside Jerusalem. Everybody knew about it because sooner or later everybody dumped their trash in that place. Because it was a city dump, the fires never went out - being constantly fed by the waste products dumped there. The worms never stopped eating because garbage was always thrown away there. Therefore Jesus' reference to gehenna as the place where fires never went out and where worms never stopped eating was understood by one and all. By everyone except gentiles who've been infected by church fear mongering myths and legends. Gehenna was also the place where in older times children were sacrificed to the pagan god Molech. (see 1 & 2 Kings and the book of Leviticus) Rabbinic literature first linked gehenna to a place where the wicked were sent. Jesus did NOT give credemce to Rabbinic literature at all, but restricted His teaching to the Torah and Tanakh (LAW & Prophets). Therefore when Jesus referred to gehenna, He was talking about the city dump. Everyone who heard Him understood His meaning. In the same way references to hades are likewise based upon pagan myth. Hades is the name of the king of the underworld - of the dead according to Greek myth. Hades is not the name of a place, its the name of a mythical character. Translations and interpretations of hades as meaning hell are likewise wrong. There is no hell. The Bible speaks of the Second Death, the Lake of Fire, where satan and sinners are consumed, burned up, utterly destroyed, annihilated and deleted permanently. It is the Lake of Fire (gehenna) that burns forever - NOT those thrown into it. Those sentenced to the Second Death are utterly destroyed. Not even ashes remain - as in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Fire burns as long as it has fuel. Fuel is always consumed. If you know of a fuel that isn't consumed by fire let me know as I'd like to use it in my car. The fiction of hell assumes that sinners will endure perpetual torture at the hands of Jesus, but the Bible nowhere describes Jesus as being the owner and operator of a subterranean torture chamber. ONLY THE RIGHTEOUS are granted immortality. The pagan concept of hell suggests that sinners likewise live forever albeit in torment. The Bible nowhere asserts this idea. Ancient Egyptians taught that humans had a quality that survives death. The Bible says otherwise. It says only God is immortal. “who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light” - 1 Tim 6:16 The Bible says humans do NOT have a quality that survives death. The Bible says people are mortal - they die. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; - Genesis 6:3a Therefore, since the nature of man is to die spiritually, physically and mentally, THE GOOD NEWS of the gospel is that God has decided to grant or cloth those who surrender to Him with immortality - and only them. that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
  13. The Bible explains the purpose of the veil. It separated the people from God's LAW and MERCY, symbolized by the ark of the covenant (LAW) and its lid - the mercy seat (GRACE), hidden within the Holy of Holies. Only the high priest, the Cohen HaGadol, was allowed access behind the veil and then only once per year. The nature of God (TRUTH) isn't the issue being discussed - the issue at hand. Your brief use of the word truth suggests that God's truth was always open and available to everyone at all times, even those years prior to Jesus' death. It was not generally available. It was available ONLY via the Law (Torah) and the Prophets (Tanakh) as explained by the prophets. Additionally, the limited revelations of truth were only available to Jews. In many cases God's revelations took the form of object lessons - historic events meant to teach a lesson. Read the Old Testament. It happens again and again and again and again and again. The issue of the veil addresses access to LAW and MERCY/GRACE by all. Access was restricted until the death of Christ, as symbolized by the splitting of the veil. Jesus is now our Cohen HaGadol. (Read the book of Hebrews) Jesus is the truth and those who surrender to Him know the truth because HE has opened it to us through His LAW and MERCY. On the other hand, those that continue to rely upon religious slogans and buzz words know not the truth. Like a parrot they make sounds like words, but know not their meaning. that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
  14. "I and the Father are ONE." - Jesus as quoted by John 10:30 Sh'ma Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Echad - Deuteronomy 6:4 English translation: Hear O Israel the Lord thy God, The Lord is ONE. The Hebrew word Echad is used here instead of the Hebrew word Yachid. Yachid means an absolute one - as in the number one, as in a single person being one person alone. Echad means one as in a unity. The most commonly used English term similar to this is the term used to describe the United States - E pluribus Unum, or One from Many, a union. Echad therefore implies a unity of divine personality. Jews don't extrapolate their oldest prayer into its meaning in Christ. Gentiles continue to think of God as separate deities as illustrated by attempts on these pages to explain it. Mostly they don't even know this ancient prayer exists or what it really means. Now, you do. "Before Abraham was, I AM" - Jesus as quoted by John 8:58 Jesus declared Himself to be HASHEM, meaning the Name of God. This statement created the greatest contention created between Jesus and the priests of ancient Israel. In these five words alone, Jesus told us He is God. He explains the mystery of who He really is. Jesus IS GOD. I have been with you all this time, and still you do not know Me? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words I say to you, I do not speak on My own. Instead, it is the Father dwelling in Me, performing His works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me—or at least believe on account of the works themselves. - Jesus as quoted by John 14:9 - 11 It was necessary for God to die upon the cross so that the requirement of the LAW be fulfilled. If Jesus wasn't God, then the LAW is not fulfilled and no one is saved from their sins. that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
×
×
  • Create New...