Naziyr

There is a difference in sin though... Sinning against others, and Sinning against self. When you take part in sexual sins, you defile yourself and sin against yourself. When you take part in any other sin, you sin against another. Fornication = Defiling yourself, sinning against yourself Murder = Killing someone else, sinning against them See the difference? But no, homosexuality should NOT be viewed with more or less awareness and reprimand than Adultery, Idolotry, etc. etc. for people were Killed equally for breaking even one of the 10 commandments in the times of old. Usually though, the lack of awareness comes from Christians preaching we are free from the Torah, when we're not. Shalom

...lol How many combined forces wars have the Arab nations lost trying to "win back" Israel through military victory? How many times has Israel sucessfully defended itself and even occupied the land of their attackers? For one, playing with a lion and getting these results... well who's really gonna be dumb enough to put their hand back in it's mouth? Secondly, if the Muslim world can't WIN back Israel through conventional military victory, then obviously "Allah" is not with their armies. If he can't empower armies to Win back Israel... what makes terrorism against Israel so logical? "Let us shoot this BB Gun at the moving train!" Shalom

"Sorry amor, that is not how it works. You can quote dictionaries all day. Aiding and abedding the enemy, supplying means, motive, equipment, shelter, arms, space encouragement and inspiration to the sworn enemy of ANY nation makes you an enemy combatant. It does not matter if you are actually holding a gun or not. If you are actively contributing to the success of the enemy, you are one of them." This is true. In WW2 the US bombed Axis Munitions factories, though the factories themselves weren't actively participating in armed combat, they were giving aid to the Axis war effort. A terrorist is in the house of someone who is pro-terrorism, and aids them in killing anti-terrorist forces... then where do these people stand? Don't get me wrong, I know some civilians are killed in Israel's bombings, but they are 90% more accurate in what they hit and where they hit. Collatoral damage is a part of every war, and is seemingly unavoidable, but is Collatoral damage the same as what Hezbollah is doing? Hezbollah sees ALL civilians of ISRAEL as the enemy, no matter if they are military or not. So they fire their rockets on a whim and hope they kill someone and it doesn't matter who, civilian or not. Tell me this is the same as Israel selecting Hezbollah targets, and not randomly firing cruise missles on the populace. IF Israel was doing what Hezbollah was doing, would there be a problem with the boarder? No... cause it would have been blasted off the map. Do you think if Israel was like minded and started firing Tomahawk Missles and leveling whole cities, they wouldn't endure as much criticism as they are now? Do you not think Israel has the munitions to do these things? Everyone cries rants and raves about Israel bombing specific targets in Lebanon, and even brought in the UN to put an end to it (which btw, the UN couldn't stop Israel if Israel wanted to keep fighting, but Israel stated that it just wanted the boarder secure), yet all the time that Hezbollah was/has been firing rockets into Israel killing CIVILIANS, no one lifts a finger to stop it. The bully pushed the new guy around, till the new guy snapped and gave the bully a black eye and bloody nose. And people have a problem with this? Shalom

"Why would I misinterpret that scripture? I embrace it, and yet I do not "observe" the Torah, but I do observe the Messiah. I do love the OT. Is that what you are referencing?" I think you observe it more than you know. At least if you obey the 10 commandments, or "love the L-rd your G-d with all etc. etc." (which is mosaic law btw). Messiah was Torah observant, so was Paul, so was James, so was Ananias, so was Timothy, so was Peter... there's tons of NT believers that were Torah observant. People see this as "eeevil Law". But the Law of G-d isn't evil. But that's another debate for another time. But my scriptural reference wasn't to goad you into anything or test you, it was just a question to see what you viewed, or your views. That commandment is Torah commandment, so you fundamentally observe a part of the Torah, and embrace part of the Torah. What is the Torah? The Law. mmm tricky. "slamming some one claiming Christ, good deal," Claiming Christ, walking the path of heresy and Paganism. You're defending a false prophet, good deal. "and then slamming some one that says muslims are not good..... that is a good deal too..." If this is in reference to Hinny, just cause I don't like muslims doesn't make me righteous. Neither does it him. Trying to justify a false prophet, that is a good deal too..." "seems a bit two sided here.... a bit two faced. swaying to and fro with every little breeze.... " Seems more like ignorance to me *cough*. "Hi hr,jr. Surely G-d Himself gave us the test of a true and a false prophet in Deuteronomy 18:20-22. The fruit of a false prophet is false prophecy. I can give you any amount of Prophecies that BH has spoken under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and which have not come to pass. "I rejoice with you in your healing. but sometimes G-d heals despite men, this doesn't make BH a true prophet. "L-rd L-rd have we not done many mighty things in thy name?" The truth of the matter is that in the Old Testament you were only allowed one go if you claimed to be speaking in G-d's name and you had to be right because G-d doesn't make mistakes." How very true. Shalom

"So you dont believe in the holy ghost? (thats how its refered to in the Bible.)" Lol I think you're kidding right? Well that's in the King James Version. In modern versions it's rendered correctly as "Holy Spirit". There's no "ghost" in the original languages... so it's just an Englishman trying to translate something in commonly idendifiable terms. Shalom

lol! I recently visited a church where they had an announcement on windows media player, going onto the overhead thingy... and they were talking about buying fire bibles.. and this guy was singing about "Christ willlllll go onnnnnnnn" and he's singing and singing and at the end is like "Remember Christ will continue o-o-o-o-o-o *bzzzt*" and the media player skips and the music video pauses and crashes. Great message eh? Christ will go o-o-o-o-o-o-o LOL (I thought it was ironic that the guy was singing about that, and the video doesn't finish and doesn't go on) Technology. Aint it wonderful? Shalom

Ignorance as in "unknowing". IF you don't think G-d ever destroyed people who were ignorant, then you haven't read the full story of G-d telling the Children of Israel to wipe out whole nations ( who had not been preached to, or offered a chance to repent ). Shalom

Yes eternal, the seer who brought up Samuel for Saul was one who "calls up the dead". Shalom

If all people know of Christ, then the missionary concept is void. What is a Missionary? What message do they bring? Why do they bring the message to countries whom they claim "haven't heard..."? Shalom

Um "Ghost" is a term usually applied to spirits haunting from the dead... but scripture is against this. There HAVE been spirits brought up from the grave by a seer, or witch (Like Saul bringing up Samuel). But no, no ghosts. Shalom

To observe Torah is to Observe Moshiac. Unless you think that when the Torah says: "And you shall love the L-rd your G-d with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might." Deuteronomy 6:5 means... don't Observe him? No the Torah is in fact all for G-d, all for Christ. Observing Torah is observance of Christ (who observed it, as did Paul, James, Timothy, Ananias, etc. etc.). Shalom

I won't follow a non torah observing Pastor... and Ol' benny boo isn't torah observant. The end. Shalom

Which "you" are you talking about? Cause from this... "And the L-rd G-d said to the woman, What is this you have done? And the woman said, The serpent deceived me, and I ate." Genesis 3:13 It's clear He is adressing Her and She replies back to him. Later he addresses Adam. How do "you" know it's plural? Care to back it up? Lol. Shalom

The Hebrew for: "And the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and the tree was desirable to make one wise. And she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave to her husband with her, and he ate." "gave to her husband with her" is not translated as "standing beside her" but the original Hebrew shows "equally with" her. Meaning "given the same amount of fruit". It should be "and she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave to her husband, to eat with her, and he ate" Check it out for yourself. Shalom

Well nebula, I know maaaany maaaany Jews that grew up in an intellectual upbringing, and they are still devout and trying to be faithful servants of G-d. I know many Christians that are brought up in the same way, and go wild once in high school and college. What is the difference? Well for one they are not brought up in the Torah, but rather weak traditional Christian teaching that states the believer is suppose to set themselves up against the Law. For two, alot of these households base their "spirituality" off of "feeling". If Job had submitted to his "feelings" would he be the same? Shalom

Adam wasn't right there when Eve did it. Just because point A and point C are joined without point B, doesn't mean that nothing happened between A and C. Traditional thinking on this, is that Adam would not have allowed Eve to take the fruit if he was sitting nearby. Adam knew fully, the Commandment (as it had been given to him directly from G-d), and would have helped his wife not submit to the snake's teaching. But he wasn't there. There's no evidence to support this. Being that Genesis starts off in summary form, it's easy to see this is summary of what happened. Shalom

Lol... As well as being brought up in a severely Antinomianist movement, and being fundamentally Jew haters by revile of the Torah. WTG modern christianity Shalom

"This thread offends me >.<" lol Nah. But good point. Take some time, chill people. =D Shalom

I've read through every post so far, and I must say that while Shiloh has made considerable points about Paul, the opposition seems to think Paul has a "dual purpose" compromising his message to gain converts. Paul didn't have to trick people into having Faith in Christ. This is not like mormonism where people are permitted to "lie for G-d". Paul certainly didn't preach two gospels. He taught one. Was Paul a Torah Observant Jew? Of course he was. James and the Council decreed Paul was observant of the law in this passage: "And they were informed about you, that you teach falling away from Moses, telling all the Jews throughout the nations not to circumcise their children, nor to walk in the customs. What then is it? At all events, a multitude must come together, for they will hear that you have come. Then do this, what we say to you: There are four men who have a vow on themselves; taking these, be purified with them, and be at expense on them, that they may shave the head. And all shall know that all what they have been told about you is nothing, but you yourself walk orderly, keeping the Law." Acts 21:21-24 Now Paul was accused by unsaved people, of not keeping the Law or Customs, but the Council (Majority of which were Jews), told Paul to go "be purified with them" which means to offer up the sacrifices (Review Numbers Chapter 6 To see what those sacrifices are), and to be at expence on them (help them pay for THEIR sacrifices), that they may shave the head (to end the Vow of the Nazirite). So the Council wanted Paul to show everyone, that what the Unsaved had said about him (That he wasn't following the Law) was false, and that he really DID follow the Law. Now Paul, if the thought that to observe the Law was to be "in Bondage" why would he submit himself to "bondage" for the sake of men? He wouldn't. Paul wasn't a hypocrite who preached one thing, and practiced another, no if the Council had said something about him that wasn't true, he would have said something. How do we know this? Because he scolded Peter the Apostle himself, for acting oppositional to truth. So if he didn't like what James and the elders said about him, he would have said something. Now if you don't believe Christians can be Christian and follow the Law, then here's another example. The Guy that came to Paul by order of Christ, was Ananias. A Believer. He himself was obedient to the Torah, so much that even the JEWS spoke highly of him. ""In that city was a man named Ananias, a religious man who obeyed our Law and was highly respected by all the Jews living there. He came to me, stood by me, and said, 'Brother Saul, see again!' At that very moment I saw again and looked at him." Acts 22:12-13 (Remember in that verse, he's speaking HEBREW to a Jewish crowd. When he says "our Law" he's referring to the... TORAH! Yay!) (In reference to this:) "And there was a certain disciple in Damascus named Ananias. And the L-rd said to him in a vision, Ananias! And he said, Behold, L-rd, I am here. And the L-rd said to him, Rising up pass along on the street being called Straight and seek a Tarsian, Saul by name, in the house of Judas. For, behold, he is praying. And he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in and putting a hand on him, so that he may see again. And Ananias answered, L-rd, I have heard from many about this man, how many bad things he did to Your saints in Jerusalem. And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all the ones calling on Your name. And the L-rd said to him, Go, for this one is a chosen vessel to Me, to bear My name before nations and kings and the sons of Israel. For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of My name. And Ananias went away and entered into the house. And putting hands on him he said, Brother Saul, the L-rd has sent me, Jesus, the One who appeared to you in the highway on which you came, that you may see and be filled of the Holy Spirit." Acts 9:10-17 It's not too hard to see that Paul, and even believers in this day were Torah observant. Shalom for now.

Scripture commands us to be baptized, so in that context, if we disobey the commandment, are we showing a serving heart towards G-d or ourselves? Disobedience is the sign of an unfaithful servant. (First thing Paul did after Jesus revealed himself, and directly after recieving faith was....) "And Ananias went away and entered into the house. And putting hands on him he said, Brother Saul, the L-rd has sent me, Jesus, the One who appeared to you in the highway on which you came, that you may see and be filled of the Holy Spirit. And instantly it was as if scales fell away from his eyes. And rising up at the thing happening, he was baptized. And taking food he was strengthened. And Saul was with the disciples in Damascus some days. And at once in the synagogues he proclaimed the Christ, that this One is the Son of G-d." Acts 9:17-20 (LITV) Yes, baptized immediately upon having Faith. We must begin our journey in obedience to Christ, and what the scriptures have told us, and shown us by example. You will see that immediately following conversions, people were baptized. Does this mean that those who cannot be baptized are forsaken? Certainly not. Men on death row may come to the knowledge of Christ, and still recieve salvation even though they cannot be baptized. Shalom

I find it interesting what goes on in Genesis 19:1-4 When the Angels (who weren't recognized as Angels by the sinful people of Sodom) came to the gate of the City, Lot was there hanging out at the gate. Lot was a righteous man who recognized them for who they were, and invited them into his house and placed himself as their servant recognizing their authority. He then made unleavened bread as well as a feast. What's the importance of unleavened bread? It represent Purity because it has no leavening in it (which is seen as yeast, which is unclean in certain ceremonial respects). The same unleavened bread was used at the Last Supper where Mosiach broke the bread and declared that "This is my body". This bread is also VERY symbolic of what happens later on to the Nation of Israel. (skipping over some verses cause I don't want to make this a full page and disrupt the bible reading ) Genesis 12-17 Is sooooo awesome. First the angels ask Lot if there is any one else besides himself and his family in the city ( Gen 19:12 ). Lot went out into the city and warned them about the coming judgement on the city ( Gen. 19:13,14 ). The angels then warned him again that the judgement was coming, yet he lingered... so the Angels led he and his wife by the hand out of the City (Gen 19:15,16). Once outside, the angels told him not to look back but to flee to the mountain, but instead he went to a smaller city nearby, for he was afraid of the mountain (Gen 19:17-22). When he had done so, the the sun had risen upon the earth (Gen 19:22). Now how is this symbolic? Remember the Exodus? Here's a short comparison. The two Angels entered in through the Gate of Sodom. Moses and Aaron entered in through the gates of Egypt. The Two Angels brought a message of freedom from Destruction. Moses and Aaron brought a message of freedom from Slavery. The Two Angels led Lot and his Wife (with family) out of Sodom by the hand (literally). Moses and Aaron led the children of Israel out of Egypt by the hand (figuratively). The Two Angels ate Unleavened Bread with Lot and his family shortly before leaving Sodom. Moses and Aaron ate Unleavened Bread with Israelites before taking them out of Egypt. The Two Angels urged Lot and his Family to go to the "mountain" to be safe. Moses and Aaron urged the Israelites to go to the "mountain" to receive the Law of G-d. Lot refused and did not go to the mountain because they were afraid. The Israelites refused to "go to the mountain" because they were afraid. The Angels destroyed the City killing everyone, destroying them (behind a fleeing Lot and Family) with Fire. The Angel of Death smote the Egyptians killing many, and the Egyptian army was killed (behind a fleeing Israel) by an imploding sea (Water). Anyways this has gotten to be a long post, sorry Shalom

Strange indeed. Do you have kids? Maybe you're rejected by them too . Shalom

"Under your rationale, God created the Earth and universe ~6000 years ago, correct? God also created the laws of phsyics did he not? My question is this: How is it that we see light from stars which are millions of light years away from Earth? If the world/universe was only 6000 years old, then wouldn't we only see the light from stars fewer than 6000 light years away from us?" First of all, your theory on creationist light is off... cause you're not paying attention to the story . Now this isn't to argue the creationism or big bang right now, but stating the obvious about what the bible says, and why your assumption is wrong. First, you assume that light years starts when A (stars) is created and B (our planet) is created and so time starts there and light must move through temporal moments to reach earth. This is a false assumption about the text. In the story, it states that the light from the stars, and the Sun is visable from earth, the very moment they come into existance. From a creationist point of view, waiting any period of time for light to reach earth is just... not reasonable. Do you get it? I shall make a little picture =D . <-Star [----------distance between star and earth ----------] Earth -> . If by a Creationist view, all three points are created at once, meaning, Star, Expanse of Space, and Earth, and G-d already had the light from the Star visable from the Earth, then Time is not something the equation is subjective to. Time dictates that yes, it would take light years for light to get to earth from the Star, but that's if all three weren't created at the same time, and the effect (visable light from earth) created at the same time as well. For in that temporal moment when time is stopped, light is frozen, and it no longer travels the distance, yet light is continual in the sense that it started at one point in time, and so did the effect (visable light). Make sense? Now from like, the big bang theory... no that's a stupid theory... um... well there's not much else that's a plausible theory as far as I know. Nothing comes from Nothing, not the other way around, and no, don't try to do the "static energy" theory either... that's dumb too. Lol like static energy dispersing at different intervals building complex particles, and then forming objects like rocks and liquids... ya like that's plausible. First you have the problem of how "Static Energy" becomes "aggressive energy", and then how does static energy form when there's no source for the energy. Anyways sorry I jibber jabber on so much. I myself, don't exclude either concept of a 6 day creation, or an evolutionary process, because I think both can and do exist in harmony. Such as micro evolution, rapid molecular alteration (mutation, which is a form of evolutionary process), organisms forming resistances to harmful products to suit environment (also evolutionary function)... there's lots. But also could an all powerful G-d not employ an evolutionary process for man to be cared for in his existance? Even if the world WAS formed a few thousand years ago, there's TONS the human body had to overcome to get where it is now. Ya.. okay done. =P Shalom

I don't agree. Have you had much contact with them? Most of the missionaries that are sent, are raised in the Church and are indoctrinated, but aren't unreachable. Who are we to decide who the Master wants to save, and who He doesn't? I know of a few 'missionaries' that have found true salvation in Christ (left the church), because they went to the right house. I myself have gone through quite a many missionaries, and there's been times when they've told me that they were compelled to search things out more deeply because of the time I spent with them (because I like to bring up stuff they aren't really taught about, like Jewish Custom, Ritual... they didn't even know what a tallit or Kippah was till I showed em... then their faces lit up and you could see them saying to themselves "that's soo cool!"). All of their lives they are raised to be indoctrinated from birth in the way of their Church. In a way, they are no different than Muslims, Janists, Bhuddists, etc. ... I mean we'd whitness to those groups right? Tell them of Jesus right? So if you'd be willing to whitness to those people as they came across you, such as like in a grocery store, or the library, or work (eek! )why not whitness to Mormons who show up on your very doorstep? "Hello?" Shalom P.S. On a side note, I think it's sad, and my mom pointed this out to me once when they came to my house... "You know, when I see those boys, I see you. As a mother I see their youth, and they way they are going, and what they are believing... and I get sad thinking that those boys are only a year or two difference from your age. What if my son was misled, even by myself and truly found G-d and salvation?" She was teary though, cause I'm her widdle man right . But I stopped viewing them as "missionary mormons" and started seeing them through the eyes of a parent, of a friend, and I want what's best for them now... and that's True Salvation found in Christ. And I will be as stubburn as I can with them. I will fight it out, pray it out, debate it out, give all that I can of myself, and if that effort leads even one of these young boys to Christ, it's worth it to me.

"Didn't Nero start a great fire in the city of Rome?" Well no one really knows who did it, but we all know who got the blame. The Christians. (also some Jewish council members who were oppositional to Rome's interests) Shalom