THIS IS VOL 731B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 2 THESSALONIANS, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] DISCOURSE ON APPARENT BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS AND DIVINE INSPIRATION, [4] AN ARTICLE ON, THE HUMAN BODY’S ABILITY TO REPAIR WOUNDS, [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. Matthew 22:34 – 38, (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
Our love for Jehovah should spring from the heart. Jesus made that clear when a Pharisee asked him which was the greatest commandment.
What did Jesus mean when he said that we must love God with our “whole heart”? He meant that we must love Jehovah with our entire figurative heart, affecting our desires, emotions, and feelings. We must also love him with our “whole soul,” or our life and being. Moreover, we must love God with our “whole mind,” or our full intellect. In essence, we ought to love Jehovah fully, without reservation.
[3] DISCOURSE ON APPARENT BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS AND DIVINE INSPIRATION:
INTRODUCTION:
Some misguided ones who lack true Bible knowledge often contend that the Bible contradicts itself and/or promotes wrong doing, killing, or some other error. But in reality this is not the case. The Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most posters on threads on this forum can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.
EXPLANATION OF WARS OF JUDGMENT:
There are many passages that require real study since on the surface they appear to be contradictory, but when carefully examined this has been found to NOT be the case. One example of this they point to is God's (YHWH's) Commandment at Exodus 20:13, "Thou shalt not kill." (Authorized King James Bible; AV), and the many wars Israel engaged in at God's (YHWH's)direction in which they killed the enemy, a seeming contradiction. But in reality it is NOT a contradiction since a loving God (YHWH) needed to execute judgment against the evil ones to protect his then chosen people. This is shown at Deuteronomy 20:16-18, "`Only, of the cities of these peoples which Jehovah thy God is giving to thee `for' an inheritance, thou dost not keep alive any breathing; 17 for thou dost certainly devote the Hittite, and the Amorite, the Canaanite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite, as Jehovah thy God hath commanded thee, 18 so that they teach you not to do according to all their abominations which they have done to their gods, and ye have sinned against Jehovah your God." (Young's Literal Translation; YLT); and at Deuteronomy 7:16, "`And thou hast consumed all the peoples whom Jehovah thy God is giving to thee; thine eye hath no pity on them, and thou dost not serve their gods, for a snare it `is' to thee." (YLT).
The fact is that God (YHWH) himself actually used his forces to fight for Israel in these wars in these wars of execution of judgment as testified to at Joshua 10:14, "And there was no day like that before it or after it, that Jehovah hearkened unto the voice of a man: for Jehovah fought for Israel." (American Standard Version; ASV); and at Joshua 10:42, "And all these kings and their land did Joshua take at one time, because Jehovah, the God of Israel, fought for Israel." (ASV). In fact, the dread of the true God (YHWH) came to be on all of the pagans as shown at 2 Chronicles 20:29, "And the fear of God was on all the kingdoms of the countries, when they heard that Jehovah fought against the enemies of Israel." (ASV). However, early true Christians did NOT participate in the wars of men, i.e., the pagan Roman Empire as shown in a book by Professor Jesse E. Wrench, "The Christians refused to show their loyalty by burning incense to the emperor. Being men of peace, they would not serve in the Roman armies." [source - "The March of Civilization, Ancient and Medieval World," by Jesse E. Wrench, Professor of History at the University of Missouri, 1931, page 205] showing their respect for God's (YHWH's) law in Exodus. Another writer, Eugene A. Colligan, stated in his book, "They preferred the Kingdom of God to any kingdom that they might serve on earth....Since they believed in peace, they would not serve in Rome's imperial armies." [source - "From the Old World to the New," Eugene A. Colligan, Associate Superintendent of Schools, City of New York, and Maxwell F. Littwin, Principal, New York City Public Schools, pages 88-89].
EXPLANATION OF HIGHER CRITICISM FROM THE WRITINGS OF DR. GRIESBACH:
A Jewish scholar, ri Kuchinsky, wrote this about Dr. Griesbach:
"Eminent German rationalist theologian & father of modern literary/historical analysis of the biblical text. Born in Hesse, Griesbach studied under Johann S. Semler at Halle (Prussia). He expanded the base of the Greek with what he discovered during extensive travels & published (1774-75) the first revised edition of the traditional Greek complete with an extensive critical apparatus. He was appointed professor of NT studies at the U of Jena (1775). In 1776 he published A Synopsis of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark & Luke, the work that launched modern gospel studies. Since that time these three gospels have been referred to as "the synoptics."
Pointing to discrepancies between gospel narratives, Griesbach dismissed traditional attempts to harmonize these accounts & focused attention on their literary dependence instead. He accepted J. B. Koppe's observation that the text of Mark is often closer Luke. This led him to turn Augustine's theory that Luke used Matthew & Mark around and claim that Mark was an uninspired compilation from Matthew & Luke. In 1789 he published his defense of this thesis as "A Demonstration that the Whole Gospel of Mark is Excerpted from the Narratives of Matthew & Luke." In the 19th c. Griesbach's thesis was championed by his student, W. L. de Wette. After years of neglect it was revived in 1964 by the American scholar, W.R. Farmer as "the Two Gospel hypothesis."
In his Demonstration, Griesbach summed up his argument as follows:
This is a summary of the thesis we are defending:
* When writing his book, Mark had not only Matthew but also Luke positioned before his eyes;
* and from these (texts) he excerpted whatever deeds, speeches and sayings of the Savior he committed to memory;
* so that mainly & most often he followed Matthew as a guide;
yet sometimes, leaving Matthew, he allied himself with Luke;
* where he would stick to Matthew's tracks, he still would not let Luke out of his eyesight, but would compare him with Matthew and vice-versa;
* he would try to be brief, as he wanted to write a book with minimum mass; So not only did he leave out what was not pertinent to the role of teacher, which the Lord performed in public..., he also passed over several of Christ's wordier speeches.
* Furthermore, ...he kept in mind his readers: that is, people far from Palestine, among whom the maxims & customs of Palestinian Jews, especially the Pharisees, were not well known, nor were necessary to know; so, partly for this reason,
* he would cut out some things found in Matthew or Luke that were meant only for Jews, especially those in Palestine, or fit their way of thinking...,
* he would be stingier in citing OT passages...,
* he would add things that he thought necessary as illustration or useful for his readers to understand the narrative....
Thus, in Griesbach's view, Mark worked like a cross between a researcher & a Reader's Digest editor to produce for non-Jewish readers a single condensed version of two books, adding only minor details & 24 new sentences to passages quoted from his sources. Other scholars, like J. G. Herder, were not persuaded that this presented a realistic picture of how ancient scribes functioned.
[For full text & further information see J. J. Griesbach: Synoptic and text- critical studies 1776-1976 (ed. by B. Orchard & T. R. W. Longstaff) Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press, 1978. The passage translated here from Latin is found on pp. 76-77].
New Testament Textual Criticism is often seen as the most obscure of all biblical disciplines. The textual scholars are the folks whose responsibility it is actually to produce the text of the NT that the Christians are reading today. All English translations of the gospels are based on the work of these Textual Critics, who have assembled the Greek text of the gospels from many old biblical manuscripts as they saw fit.
Yes, generally, it's quite an obscure field... The disputes among the professional Textual Critics are still many and bitter. They still keep disputing about the simplest things. For example, they still cannot agree among themselves, Which of the three main NT texts-types -- Alexandrian, Byzantine, and Western -- is the earliest?
But, actually, I'm saying that the Textual Criticism isn't such a difficult area at all... In fact, the whole thing is extremely simple!
Just how simple it is? It's actually so simple that, as I see it, the biggest problem in this area had already been solved over 200 years ago! And it seems like it's been downhill ever since...
Thus, today's NT Textual Criticism seems to be mostly smoke and mirrors. Indeed, it now looks to me like these folks spend far more time obscuring some of the most obvious things in this area, rather than clarifying them. And, as a result -- sorry to say, friends -- our mainstream "eclectic" text of the gospels, as well as all the English translations based on it, appear to be all wrong...
The following is a brief review of the work of Griesbach, and of some other famous Textual Critics of the times long past -- the scholars such as Hug and Lachmann. This review is based on the information that I've assembled from other biblical historians. All this can be easily verified.
GRIESBACH HAD IT RIGHT!
looks to me like the Textual problem of the NT had been solved by J. J. Griesbach -- who was one of the great pioneers of biblical criticism -- already by the end of the 18th century! And so, everything that happened in biblical studies ever since was simply footnotes...
And the reason why it was so easy for Griesbach to solve this main textual problem was... because it was so easy! At least that's how it seems to me...
In modern TC textbooks, Dr. J. J. Griesbach is cited as the originator of the classification of all our NT MSS into the three basic families, Western, Alexandrian, and Byzantine (although we can also note that he relied on the work of his mentors, such as Semler). Griesbach also formulated almost all of the major rules of TC that are still in use even now.
The following account is based on an overview by Dr. A. Klijn (see the ref below), who is, himself, one of the big Textual Critics today.
According to Klijn, Griesbach started his analysis by studying the works of Origen, an early Alexandrian Church Father, and the biblical quotations as found in these writings. He observed that Origen had used two different texts of Mark; one of them close to the Alexandrian type, and the other one close to the text of Codex Bezae -- that famous very ancient NT manuscript of "Western" type. Of course, Western text was already very well known in Europe prior to Griesbach, because this was the text as represented by numerous versions of the gospels that still survive in the Old Latin.
Furthermore, Griesbach observed that these Western gospel texts, as found in Europe, had many similarities to the Syriac Peshitta -- a very important observation. So these unusual old texts of "Western type" could be found both in the West and in the East!
Griesbach could see clearly that both Western and the Alexandrian texts deviate widely from the Majority Text (which is represented for us now by the KJV). The Majority Text was the text that was most popular since the Middle Ages; thus it is found in the majority of old biblical MSS.
One of Griesbach's most noteworthy observations was that Western text represented a pre-recension text. In other words, according to him, these Western texts were current before the NT had been published as a whole. In Griesbach's view, when the canon was finally closed and settled upon, that older text came to be rejected by Church authorities.
And so, Griesbach was somewhat hesitant to describe Western text as a "recension". The only true recensions, according to him, were the Alexandrian and the Byzantine, because there's a lot more consistency within these two textual families. Thus, Western text was a pre-recension text.
So, as we can see, it was the Patristic evidence that led Griesbach to all these revolutionary discoveries. It was the quotes from the old Church Fathers that, according to him, still preserve for us the earliest pre-recension gospel text.
So this is how Klijn summarises these matters,
"Griesbach noticed that Marcion, Irenaeus and even Clement of Alexandria, who wrote before the recensions used a Western text." [SOURCE -(A. Klijn, A SURVEY OF THE RESEARCHES INTO THE WESTERN TEXT OF THE GOSPELS AND ACTS: Part 1, Utrecht, 1948, p. 7)]
Also, Lachmann, another great pioneer of TC, continued the work of both Griesbach and Hug. Writing in 1831, he stated that, based on the extant NT manuscripts, it was not possible to construct a text which would go any farther back than the fourth century.
So this was an extremely honest observation on the part of Lachmann. Indeed, to all intents and purposes, our canonical Greek texts -- whether Alexandrian or Byzantine -- are really nothing other than the Catholic texts as commonly accepted in the fourth century. (The former was popular in Egypt, but then abandoned; the latter was popular in Constantinople, and became the standard text in the early middle ages.)
So Griesbach was right; the earliest text was Western. (I, myself, prefer to describe it as the Peripheral text -- after all, the name "Western text" is just such an obvious misnomer, in light of the fact that it's the eastern MSS that are its key representatives. See this article #where I explain this matter some more.) And he was working at the time when the ancient Old Syriac Aramaic gospels -- our main Western/Peripheral texts today -- were still unknown to scholarship! Yet, still and all, he put this whole puzzle together quite easily, using the Syriac Peshitta as his reference.
Sure, he was a very talented biblical scholar. But, still, how could TC wander in the wilderness so long after him? Are our modern TC scholars really so incompetent?
Maybe so... But, in my view, it's mostly their political bias that's to blame. They are simply not brave enough to challenge today's academic-ecclesiastical consensus -- something that Griesbach obviously wasn't afraid to do even back in the eighteenth century! [SOURCE - Yuri].
DR. GRIESBACH TRANSLATION FROM KOINE GREEK TO ENGLISH THE GREEK ENGLISH PORTION OF THE EMPHATIC DIALOGTT CLEARS UP AN APPARENT BIBLE CONTRADICTION:
With respect the Emphatic Dialogtt, the word-for-word section was done by a very renown Koine Greek expert and Bible scholar, Dr. Griesbach. the standard or 'flowing-language' part, this was done by a newspaper reporter, Bengemin Wilson, who was not a translator, but knew how to take from what Dr. Griesbach had done as a word-for-word translation and put it into flowing English. Reporters would naturally be good at this.
"Now with respect to one scripture to which the poster pointed special attention, John 1:1, I had reached exactly the same conclusion as Dr. Griesbach, but from a very different analysis as follows:
"John 1:1 could in no way support the doctrine of the Trinity, as follows:
John 1:1, "When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was" (New English Translation; NEB)
John 1:1, " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (American Standard Version; ASV)
Neither mention in any way more than two beings, yet a trinity of anything requires three similar things.
However, in very careful careful analysis as an independent thinker and using my knowledge of language and translation constructs, I am able to prove it can not even support a Duality. Let's take the poor construct of this verse found in the (Authorized King James Bible; AV) which is as follows and break it down into its three sub-constructs.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Sub-construct # 1 "In the beginning was the Word."
Sub-construct # 2 "and the Word was with God"
Sub-construct # 3 "and the Word was God."
It is clear that there is a mutually exclusive condition existing between sub-construct # 2 and # 3 in that sub-construct # 2 clearly says, "the Word was with God" which clearly denotes two distinct beings, one with the other; whereas, sub-construct # 3 clearly says, "and the word was God," now obviously both can NOT be true. No individual can be with another individual and at the same time be that other individual so obviously both can NOT be so. When we look at how the New English Translation; NEB, renders these two sub-constructs we get two sub-constructs that no longer are mutually exclusive thus accurately reflecting the intent or thought of the original writer, see sub-construct #2 "The Word dwelt with God," and sub-construct # 3 "and what God was, the Word was."
Of course the New English Translation; NEB, would clearly be in line with the fact that a Son, Jesus (Yeshua), would be a lot like his Father (YHWH); therefore, he would be both divine like his Father (YHWH) and a god. To use an analogy to make this even clearer, we would expect a son dog to be a lot like father dog; a dog pure and simple; so we would also expect a son of a god to be both divine and a god.
In fact some Bible translations even use a god such as "And the word was a god" The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text. Both this rendering and that of the NEB say the same thing in different words with the NEB making it quite clear that both the Father (YHWH) and the Son, Jesus (Yeshua), are of the same substance which is clearly delineated at Philippians 2:1-11, "there is therefore any exhortation in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies and compassions, 2 make full my joy, that ye be of the same mind, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind; 3 [doing] nothing through faction or through vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; 4 not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. 5 Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient [even] unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven and [things] on earth and [things] under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (American Standard Version; ASV). Clearly testifying that the Son is of the same substance as the Father (YHWH), but just not as great as his Father (YHWH) as he himself testified to at John 14:28, "Ye heard how I said to you, I go away, and I come unto you. If ye loved me, ye would have rejoiced, because I go unto the Father: for the Father is greater than I." (ASV). Of course this would have to be the case or Exodus 20:3 , "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (ASV) would be violated.
So as can be seen the more common rendering of John 1:1 can not be correct as its sub-constructs are mutually exclusive, a physical impossibility." [by Iris the Preacher, 2004].
So this seeming contradiction is NOT that at all, but just a biased and bad translation from the original Koine Greek into English; once more giving another example where an apparent contradiction is actually NOT one at all. It is nothing more than a failure by some translators to correctly render what the original writer stated when writing in his language. However, many translators, not just Dr. Griesbach, have translated this passage in line with the thinking of the original writer, some of them are:
"<2> "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God" [example of Bible using, Schonfield, 1976]"
"<3> "The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the word was." [example of Bible using, The New English Bible, NEB, 1961-present standard Bible agreed to by most denominations in the United Kingdom]"
"<4> "And the word was a god" [example of Bible using, The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text.]"
"<5> "and the Word was divine" [example of Bible using, The Bible: An American Translation, by J.M.P. Smith and E.J. Goodspeed. }"
"<8> "the Logos was divine" [example of Bible using, The New Testament: A New Translation, by James Moffat]"
"<9> "r war bei Gott und in allem Gott gleich"[He was with God and in all like God] [example of Bible using, Haenchen (tr. By R. Funk), 1982]"
"<10> "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] [example of Bible using, Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, 1980]"
My husband favors construct # 5 ; whereas I favor constructs # 3 and # 4 ; however when you reason on any of these seven, they in essence are saying the exact same thing, but in different words. They are all recognizing that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is divine in their own way and that he is God's (YHWH's) only begotten son. This fact is clearly shown in the Bible at Philippians 2:1-11, "If there is therefore any exhortation in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies and compassions, 2 make full my joy, that ye be of the same mind, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind; 3 [doing] nothing through faction or through vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; 4 not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. 5 Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient [even] unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven and [things] on earth and [things] under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (ASV). Obviously all thinking people should believe the Bible and not accept the opinions of man.
As can easily be seen from these two examples, apparent contradictions in the Bible are NOT that al all, but just lack of understanding.
BIBLE SHOWN RELIABLE BY ACCURATE PROPHECY ABOUT JESUS (YESHUA):
Is there a way to prove inspiration or, at least, intelligently present evidence for its inspiration? The answer is "Yes!" One of the best ways to prove inspiration is by examining prophecy. There are many religious books in the world that have many good things to say. But only the Bible has fulfilled prophecies--with more fulfillments to come. The Bible has never been wrong in the past, and it won't be wrong in the future. It claims inspiration from God, " All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" (2 Timothy 3:16 AV). Since God is the creator of all things " Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;" (Isaiah 44:24 ; AV), then He (YHWH) is also the creator of time. It is under His control. Only God, then, would always be right about what is in the future, our future.
Fulfilled prophecy is strong evidence that God is the author of the Bible because when you look at the mathematical odds of prophecy being fulfilled, you quickly see a design, a purpose, and a guiding hand behind the Bible. If just one prophecy failed, then we would know that God is not the true God, because the creator of all things, which includes time, would not be wrong about predicting the future. " When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." (Deuteronomy 18:22; AV). And "Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me; 10 declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure;" (Isaiah 46:9-10; American Standard Version of 1901; ASV).
One writer and mathmatician, Peter Stoner has figured out the possibilities of the fulfillment of just eight ( prophecies happening, let alone 100 having been fulfilled, and had this to say:
The following probabilities are taken from Peter Stoner in Science Speaks (Moody Press, 1963) to show that coincidence is ruled out by the science of probability. Stoner says that by using the modern science of probability in reference to eight prophecies, 'we find that the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time and fulfilled all eight prophecies is 1 in 10 to 17." That would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. In order to help us comprehend this staggering probability, Stoner illustrates it by supposing that "we take 10 to 17 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will cover all of the state two feet deep.
"Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would have had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man."
Stoner considers 48 prophecies and says, "we find the chance that any one man fulfilled all 48 prophecies to be 1 in 10 to 157.
The estimated number of electrons in the universe is around 10 tp 79. It should be quite evident that Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies by accident." [ excerpt from book Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.]
EXAMPLES OF A FEW OF THE PROPHECIES FULFILLED IN JESUS (YESHUA OR YHWH SAVES):
PROPHECY FULFILLED WHEN JESUS WAS CRUCIFIED
[ 1. Betrayed by a friend - Psalms 41:9 - John 13:18-27 - 460 BCE ]]
[ 2. Thirty (30) of silver thrown in Temple - Zechariah 11:13 - Matthew 27:3-5 - 518 BCE ]
[ 3. Betrayed for thirty (30) pieces of silver - Zechariah 11:12 - Matthew 26:14-15 - 518 BCE ]
[ 4. Potters field bought for thirty (30) pieces of silver, Zechariah 11:13 - Matthew 27:6-10 - 518 BCE ]
[ 5. Forsaken by His disciples - Zechariah 13:7 - Mark 14:27-50 - 518 BCE ]
[ 6. Falsely accused by false witnesses - Psalms 35:11-21 - Matthew 26:59-61 - 460 BCE ]
[ 7. Remained silent before accusers - Isaiah 53:7 - Matthew 27:12-14 - 732 BCE ]
[ 8. Was wounded and bruised - Isaiah 53:4-6 - 1 Peter 2:21-25 - 732 BCE ]
[ 9. Spit upon and beaten - Isaiah 50:6 - Matthew 26:67-68 - 732 BCE ]
[ 10. Was mocked - Psalms 22:6- 8 - Matthew 27:27- 31 - 460 BCE ]
[ 11. Fell under the cross (stauros) - Psalms 109:24- 25 - John 19:17, Luke 23:26 - 460 BCE]
[ 12. Had hands and feet pierced - Psalms 22:16 - John 20:24-28 - 460 BCE ]
[ 13. Was crucified with thieves - Isaiah 53:12 - Matthew 27:38 - 732 BCE ]
[ 14. Prayed for His enemies - Isaiah 53:12 - Luke 23:34 - 732 BCE ]
[ 15. His own people rejected him - Isaiah 53:3 - John 19:14-15 - 732 BCE]
[ 16. Was hated without cause - Psalms 69:4 - John 15:25 - 460 BCE ]
PROPHECIES CONCERNING HIS RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION
[ 1. Raised from the dead - Psalms 16:8-11 - Acts 2:24-31 - 460 BCE ]
[ 2. Only begotten Son of God (YHWH) - Psalms 2:7 - Acts 13:32-35 - 460 BCE ]
[ 3. Ascended to God (YHWH) - Psalms 68:18 - Ephesians 2:8-10; John 6:26 - 460 BCE ]
[ 4. Seated at the Right Hand of God (YHWH) - Psalms 110.1 - Hebrews 1:3-13 - 460 BCE]
CONCLUSION:
As can easily be seen from the examples given, that when an apparent contradiction is researched and studied in depth, it proves to be NOT a contradiction, but a lack of understanding on the part of those calling it a contradiction. The Caliph Saladin, for example, once claimed the John 1:1 was a contradiction based on his reading of the Latin Vulgate of Jerome, but as we have seen, it was NOT a Bible contradiction. It was simply a failure on the translators part to adequately capture the understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing.
Likewise, we can see from all the prophecies about Jesus (Yeshua) that the Bible truly is inspired and the word of God (YHWH). As brought out by one writer, it would have been mathematically impossible for them to have all been fulfilled without God (YHWH) having given them and maneuvered events to have them fulfilled. Also, it proves the harmony of the Bible throughout, i.e., the New Testament is simply the fulfillment of the Old Testament.
THIS IS VOL 732B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 1 TIMOTHY, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] DISCOURSE ON INTOLERANCE, [4] AN ARTICLE ON, WHAT LIFE TELLS US ABOUT A CREATOR, [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] DISCOURSE ON INTOLERANCE:
[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY VOL [732B]
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. 1 Timothy 2:5 – 6 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
As a perfect man, Jesus (Yeshua) had prospects similar to those of Adam before he sinned. Jehovah’s purpose was to fill the earth with Adam’s perfect offspring. Hence, with deep love for his Father and for Adam’s descendants, Jesus gave up his human life in sacrifice. Yes, Jesus (Yeshua) gave up a perfect human life that corresponded to what Adam had lost. Thereafter, Jehovah restored his Son to life as a spirit. (1 Pet. 3:1 Jehovah could justly accept the sacrifice of that one perfect man, Jesus (Yeshua), as a ransom, or purchase price, to buy back Adam’s family and give them the life prospects that Adam had forfeited. In a sense, Jesus (Yeshua) took the place of Adam. Paul explains: “And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.” (1 Cor. 15:45, [AV] ).
Let's first consider what the dictionary states intolerance is so we can have a good understanding of the word:
Intolerance: (1) Incapacity or unwillingness to tolerate or endure, (2) The state or quality of being intolerant; bigotry. [source - Funk & Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary, ISBN 0-308-10309-2/ 0-308-10310-6]
Some have the tendency to mix the giving of a loving warning to others with incorrect beliefs with intolerance, and in so doing are of course in error. Now, let's look at actual cases of intolerance so as to get a better understanding of what intolerance is through actual examples.
INTOLERANCE DESCRIBED IN ACTION
a. - The case of Giordano Bruno:
A good example of intolerance was the burning at the stake of Giordano Bruno an Italian philosopher for proclaiming that the earth revolved around the sun, the Copernican system, under the bummer charge of being a heretic. Why? Because the Roman Catholic church supported the concept of the Ptolemaic system, i.e., the sun revolved around the earth and they were unwilling to tolerate or endure anyone with contrary ideas. In fact, the bummer of a charge, heretic, literally means, one who holds beliefs or opinions contrary to an established religion. [source - Funk & Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary, ISBN 0-308-10309-2/ 0-308-10310-6]. Thus this very bummer of a charge is nothing but true intolerance, 'primi facia.' Or put another way, intolerance is the denial of basic human rights to freedom of religious belief and life as shown by the above example.
b. - The case of William Tyndale:
William Tyndale was a righteous man brought up in the University of Oxford, who wanted his countrymen to have an understanding of God's (YHWH) Word. He perceived that the cause of the people's spiritual blindness, and of the errors and superstitutions of the Church, was ignorance of the scriptures. Thus Tyndale felt moved, by the Spirit of God (YHWH) to translate the Scriptures into English, his mother tongue, for the benefit of the common people. To do so, he had to go to Germany to do so, due to the intolerant seeking his life on the bummer charge of being a heretic.
When the New Testament was complete, Tyndale appealed to the learned for help, for the correction of accidental errors; but the dignitaries of the Catholic Church, indignant that the people should possess the Word of God (YHWH), clamorously inveighed against it as being so full of heresy, sedition, and inaccuracies, that its suppression was the duty of the faithful. They scanned it with a microscopic jealousy, and magnified the inadvertent omission of a letter into a flagrant and willful perversion of the original. The intolerant bishops and arch bishops were filled with wrath, not love as commanded at Matthew 22:36-40, " Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 And he said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second like [unto it] is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 40 On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets." (American Standard Version; ASV). And did not rest until they had persuaded the king to take hostile proceedings in the matter. A proclamation was then issued, under authority, which condemned and prohibited Tyndale's translation, and they conspired together in hate and intolerance how they might entangle and murder its author. They in their intolerance and hate finally captured him and burnt him at the stake. His last words were, "Lord, open the King of England's eyes!."
c. - Today, This intolerance against the true facts and those presenting them continues.
Of course the intolerant can no longer burn people at the stake who believe different than they or do not believe at all since the counterfeit so called Christian church no longer has that hateful intolerant power over the civil authorities. [source - "Foxe's Book of Martyrs," Editor, Maria Gentext King, Spire Books, Fleming H. Revell Co., Old Tappan, NJ; and Encyclopedia Britannica].
However, this intolerance against true facts persist today. Here is an example of the modern way the intolerant religious groups now operate:
"Regarding the situation with Edgar Goodspeed. The way it came across to me was that beginning with individuals like ex-witness Bill Cetnar and Walter Martin. WT antagonists pestered the man practically to his grave to get him to withdraw his original statement he gave in support of the NWT N.T. portion in the 1950's. To which he finally relented and did. I've heard his widow had to reaffirm it from time to time even after he past. Even in death they'll still hound you." [source - the wife of Edgar Goodspeed].
Speaks for itself.
COUNTERFEIT CHRISTIANS DOWNPLAY THEIR INTOLLERANCE
Today this counterfeit so called Christian church downplays the Tyndale and Giordano Bruno sagas as isolated cases, but they were not. Here is a very small list of many thousands that clearly show this, and that it was NOT only sanctioned by, but often instigated at the direct orders of the top church leader, the Bishop of Rome himself.
1. The intolerant persecution of the Albigenses (Cathars) and the genocidal killing of over one million on the direct orders of Pope Innocent III.
2. The intolerant persecution of the Waldenses on the orders of the Bishop of Rome, the Pope.
3. The intolerant persecution of Aymond de Savoy, a minister of Bourdeaux and finally his strangulation and burning.
4. James Cobard, a schoolmaster in the city of St. Michael was burned for speaking up for religious freedom.
5. Peter Chapot brought a number of French Bibles to France and sold them, and for this the counterfeit church authorities had him burnt at the stake.
6. A Genese youth, called Thomas, having rebuked a counterfeit Christian for profane swearing was burnt at the stake in Paris.
7. Simon Laloe, Matthew Dimonet, and Micholas Maile were burnt for professing a religion other than the counterfeit Christian one.
8. The Bishop of Rome launched a savage Crusade against the peaceful Muslims in Palastine.
9. The counterfeit Church launched an inquisition against all other faiths in hatred and intolerance and even burned Dr. Cacalla, his brother Francis, and his sister Blanche at Valladolid for having spoken against the inquisitors.
[ an on and on ]
1,000,001 The massacre of St. Bartholomew of the Hughenots at the directions of a hateful and intolerant counterfeit so called Christian church in 1572 a.d.
1,000,002 The intolerant and hatred against truth by the counterfeit Christians lead to the murder of John Huss a well known reformer by burning; and the pope, in conjunction with the Council of Constance, ordered the Romish clergy everywhere to excommunicate all who adopted his opinions, or pitied his fate.
1,000,003 And on and on acts of hatred and intolerance by counterfeit Christians directed by their leaders, bishops, arch bishops, cardinals, and the Bishop of Rome.
[sources - Encyclopedia Britannica; Encyclopedia Americans; "Foxe's Book of Martyrs," Editor, Maria Gentext King, Spire Books, Fleming H. Revell Co., Old Tappan, NJ; Writings of Caliph Saladin; Funk & Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary, ISBN 0-308-10309-2/ 0-308-10310-6; "Violence and the Mass Media," Harper and Row 1968; "All in The Name of the Lord, " by Bill Stringfellow, Clermont Concerned Publications 1981; 'National Sunday Law," by A. Jan Marcussen, amazing Truth Publications; "The Story of Civilization." 11 vols. 1935-75, by Will Durant; "Age of Faith," by Will Durant]
CONCLUSION
As has been amply shown, intolerance is NOT the loving exposure of false belief and doctrines, [b]but active hate and inability to countence others with other beliefs, be they right or wrong. It is the overt persecution, an inability to extend equal rights of others of basic human rights of freedom of thought and belief, and well being to others; or as the dictionary so well put it, the "incapacity or unwillingness to tolerate or endure" the opinions, beliefs, and ideas of others.
THIS IS VOL 733B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 2 TIMOTHY, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] THE BEAUTIFUL GUAVA TREE, [4] AN ARTICLE ON, WHAT LIFE TELLS US ABOUT A CREATOR, [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY, AND [3] THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES. Psidium Guajava With the Scripture of the Day first.
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [733B]
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Romans 5:12 [authorized King James Bible; AV]
This scripture highlights the need for removal of sin from us. Almighty God (YHWH) provided for this need by providing his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) as a ransom to relieve this from all of obedient mankind as testified to at 1 Timothy 2:5-6, [AV], “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” And as Philippians 2:5-6,[American Standard Version: AVS], says, “Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Clearly showing our heavenly Father, Almighty God (YHWH) loves all obedient mankind and only wants the best for us in keeping with his principle attribute per 1 John 4:10, [AV], “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”
Here is a Commentary on Bountiful Trees and Vegetables God (YHWH) has provided for mankind, specifically the GUAVA, Psidium Guajava:
In Genesis 1:11-13, "And God said, Let the earth put forth grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit-trees bearing fruit after their kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after their kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. (American Standard Version, ASV)
One of my favorite fruits that God (YHWH) has so lovingly provided for the enjoyment of mankind is the tropical GUAVA, (Psidium Guajava). It produces a very sweet fruit of fine flavor and full of vitamin C. In many Spanish speaking countries they make a delightful paste out of it somewhat of the consistency of butter that can be put on sandwiches, crackers, etc. to impart a wonderful flavor.
The common guave, Psidium Guajava, is a native to the American tropics, and has become widely distributed throughout all the warm areas of the world. In fact, its seedlings now grow wild in many areas of the tropics including south Florida and Hawaii. The common guave is often called lemon guava, pear guava, apple guava, etc. There are a great number of varieties all with different flavors some of which are more agreeable to the taste than others. Some of the varieties have round fruit, and others have oblong, pear shaped, and other shapes of fruit.
Their flesh which you eat varies in shade from white to red, but in my opinion the red colored flesh taste the best and is the sweetest.
Many food products are made from the common guava besides the paste previously mentioned. Some of these products are nectars, juices, pies, cakes, soda pop, pastries, etc. All are quite tasteful and enjoyable.
There are several important named varieties such as the Strawberry Guava, P. Catteianum, or Cattley Guava which is one of my favorites. Of this species there are many varieties ranging in size from berry size to the size of an orange.
Some Guavas are more cold hardy than others, but the berry size variety of the Strawberry Guava makes a very nice house plant in the north in a 5 to 10 gallon pot. Of course during the cold whether it must be kept in a warm area of the house. It will grown well in most well-drained loams, much, or sandy soils which are supplied with enough moisture. They require more water for their growth than do citrus trees. They are quite tolerant of acidity and alkalinity, doing well in all the circumneutral soils and even tolerating a pH down to 4.5 or up to 8.2. At either of these extremes they need more nitrogen than usual.
Some of the recognized commercial cultivators in south Florida are: Red Indian, Ruby, Supreme, Miami Red, and Miami White. Much of the work on producing other desirable clones is being conducted by members of the Cuban community in Miami, and in Dade County.
THIS IS VOL 734B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF TITUS, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] REVEALING REALITY IS UPBUILDING AND POSITIV, [4] AN ARTICLE ON ,THE STRUCTURE OF THE LIMPET’S TEETH, [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] REVEALING REALITY IS UPBUILDING AND POSITIVE
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [734B]
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. 1 Corinthians 15:28 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
By the end of the thousand years of Kingdom rule, obedient mankind will have been liberated from all enemies introduced by Adam’s disobedience. The Bible says: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” (1 Corinthians 15:22-26, [AV])
Yes, death inherited from Adam will at last be done away with. “And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the vail that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it.” (Isaiah 25:7 - 8, [AV] ).
The apostle Paul completes his inspired summary with these words: “And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:28, [AV]) The purpose of the Son’s rule will have been accomplished. He will then, with deep satisfaction, return his authority to Jehovah and present to him the perfected human family.
The message that all genuine (true) followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ have been commissioned to preach is both good news and the exposure of wrong practices. As Jesus (Yeshua) said as recorded at Mark 13:10, "And the gospel must first be preached unto all the nations." (American Standard Version; ASV). In this work of preaching the good news, Jesus (Yeshua) himself set the example as shown at Luke 4:43, "But he said unto them, I must preach the good tidings of the kingdom of God to the other cities also: for therefore was I sent." (ASV). Also, what the apostles preached was also described per 1 Thessalonians 2:1-4 as good news, "For yourselves, brethren, know our entering in unto you, that it hath not been found vain: 2 but having suffered before and been shamefully treated, as ye know, at Philippi, we waxed bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God in much conflict. 3 For our exhortation is not of error, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile: 4 but even as we have been approved of God to be intrusted with the gospel, so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God who proveth our hearts." (ASV); and at 2 Corinthians 2:12, "Now when I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ, and when a door was opened unto me in the Lord," (ASV). Such a message is upbuilding and positive.
In harmony with the declaration by angels given at Revelation 14:6-7, "And I saw another angel flying in mid heaven, having eternal good tidings to proclaim unto them that dwell on the earth, and unto every nation and tribe and tongue and people; 7 and he saith with a great voice, Fear God, and give him glory; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made the heaven and the earth and sea and fountains of waters." (ASV). It is imperative that everyone everywhere be told about the true God, Almighty God (YHWH), his name, his marvelous qualities, his wonderful works, his loving purpose, what he requires of all mankind, and our accountability to him. The good news will of course include the fact that Almighty God (YHWH) will destroy the wicked, who dishonor him and spoil life for other humans such as those who destroy the property of and murder others. Of course, all genuine (true) followers of Christ have a great warning work to do which consist of two parts; (1) telling them of the good news of the Gospel of Christ contained in the Bible; (2) And, warning and educating them with respect to false religion, doctrines, and practices. But it is not the position of genuine (true) Christians to judge anyone as this assignment has been given to Jesus (Yeshua) Christ by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) per John 5:22, "For neither doth the Father judge any man, but he hath given all judgment unto the Son;" (ASV). The desire of genuine (true) followers of Christ is that as many as possible will respond favorably to the Bible's message so that it truly will prove to be good news for them per Proverbs 2:20-22, "That thou mayest walk in the way of good men, And keep the paths of the righteous. 21 For the upright shall dwell in the land, And the perfect shall remain in it. 22 But the wicked shall be cut off from the land, And the treacherous shall be rooted out of it." (ASV).
To that end, all false doctrine and practices must be exposed since all need to be showing love to their neighbors including Jews and telling them of the first step toward salvation given at John 14:6, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (AV). Messages of hate assist no one in learning the truth per John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
Genuine (true) followers of Christ in showing true love are under obligation to exposing false doctrine so individuals can correct their wrong path. Doing so is NOT being hateful, but of loving necessity exposing false doctrine and wrong practice so amends can be made. It is necessary to expose false doctrine and practices in order to assist all in knowing the truth, per John 8:32, and to assist all in making a change in their lives by getting out of groups and/or religions that practice false doctrine and wrong practices.
All need to learn about love and that includes warning others with respect false doctrine and wrong practices instead of thinking of wrong things such as hate, greed, and a lust for violence all of which Almighty God (YHWH) hates. What true love of neighbor is clearly shown in the following,
<<"Love suffereth long, and is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5 doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not its own, is not provoked, taketh not account of evil; 6 rejoiceth not in unrighteousness, but rejoiceth with the truth; 7 beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. 8 Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall be done away; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall be done away. .. I Corinthians 13:4-8, (ASV)
Love is the power of faith. Faith needs love to be made perfect, because perfect faith results in faithfullness and faithfullness is a work of love. Faith and love go hand in hand because faith wants to believe, just as love trusts, faith sees through the darkness and weathers the storm, just as love endures all things, and faith seeks to put God first just as love always gives. 1 Corinthians 13 :4-7 Our faith is not just knowledge about God but a personal relationship with Him as Lord, and any relationship requires love to succeed, to endure trials and to grow, including our relationships with one another because we are called to be family in the Lord and to love one another. The perfect example of faith powered by love is seen in the life of Jesus Christ, who manifests Gods love ...
"Because love is the power of faith we should focus on love, seize it and cultivate it... and we can because God is love, and He imparts that love to us when we draw near to Him as the scripture says... Whatsoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy; and when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof upon any garment, thou shalt wash that whereon it was sprinkled in a holy place" .Leviticus 6:27 {ASV) and And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake; and the rocks were rent; " Matthew 27:51< (ASV). "Draw close to God, and he will draw close to you.j Cleanse your hands, you sinners,k and purify your hearts,l you indecisive ones", James 4:8 , (New World Translation Revised; NWTR) , On the other hand, the fruitagec of the spirit is love, joy,d peace,e patience, kindness, goodness,f faith, . Galatians 5: 22. ()NWTR)
He said to him: “‘You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’s 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ Matthew 22:37-39, (NWTR), "If, now, you carry out the royal* law according to the scripture, “You must love your neighbor as yourself,”h you are doing quite well." James 2:8, (NWTR), You see that his faith was active along with his works and his faith was perfected by his works, "James 2:22, (NWTR), If we love God we will seek to please Him and keep the royal law because the royal law embraces Gods will and all of His commandments. Without love we can't fulfill the royal law because we can't love the Lord unless we have love. To manifest the love of God is to overcome sin, whereas to not manifest the love of God is to sin. For the royal law is not to know about the Lord, but to love the Lord... and to love one another as ourselves. We can't do one without the other, because we can't truly love God whom we can't see if we don't love mankind who is made in the image of God. When we love one another we are manifesting our love for God whom we can't see by loving His image. Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. In turn, whoever loves me will be loved by my Father,z and I will love him and will clearly show myself to him.” "John 14:21, (NWTR) by subduing the will and power of the flesh through the power of the Holy Spirit, so that faith working through love does the will of God by turning the thought into reality which pleases Him and fulfills the royal law...
Faith without love is incomplete, residing only in the mind as knowledge, and knowledge of God's will alone can not perfect us by saving us from sin but allowing Jesus Christ to reign in our hearts. If knowledge of God's will alone could save us then salvation would have been through the law of Moses or even a Christian law handed down by Jesus, and there would not have been any need for Christ to die for our sins Galatians 2:21 and dwell in our hearts. If Jesus reigns in our hearts then the love of Christ also reigns because He is the manifestation of God's love. The heart without the love of God does not have Jesus Christ and the soul without the Spirit of Christ is not born again Romans 8:9 and cannot be perfected by being transformed into the likeness of Jesus Christ which is true salvation and the result of faith. But the soul which manifests the love of God has been washed clean by the Holy Spirit Romans 15:16 and manifests the spirit and glory of Jesus Christ... "[source - Simon Strahler]>>.
The need to lovingly try to assist others is stressed in the example of the watchman of old, the one who lovingly and faithfully warned others and the one who failed to do so as shown at Ezekiel 33:1-9, "And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 2 Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, and the people of the land take a man from among them, and set him for their watchman; 3 if, when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; 4 then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning, if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. 5 He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him; whereas if he had taken warning, he would have delivered his soul. 6 But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned, and the sword come, and take any person from among them; he is taken away in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand. 7 So thou, son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me. 8 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die, and thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way; that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thy hand. 9 Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it, and he turn not from his way; he shall die in his iniquity, but thou hast delivered thy soul." (ASV).
So as can be seen, if a genuine (true) follower of Christ is to show true love to his neighbor in keeping with Jesus (Yeshua) Christ direction as given at Matthew 5:43-48, "Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy: 44 but I say unto you, love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you; 45 that ye may be sons of your Father who is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust. 46 For if ye love them that love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the Gentiles the same? 48 Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." (ASV).
THIS IS VOL 735B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF PHILEMON
AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] REVEALING REALITY IS UPBUILDING AND POSITIVE [4] AN ARTICLE ON , WHAT MOVES MANY PEOPLE TO CONSIDER THE EXISTENCE OF A CREATOR?
https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/wp20150101/life/
[5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] WHAT IS THE TET·RA·GRAM·MA·TON
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [735B]
Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Luke 22:28 – 30 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
Unlike other covenants, in which Almighty God (YHWH) is one of the parties to the covenant, this is a personal covenant between Jesus and his anointed followers. When saying, “So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.” (5:5 – 6, (AV)
The 11 faithful apostles had ‘stuck with Jesus in his trials.’ The Kingdom covenant assured them that they would be with him in heaven and sit on thrones to rule as kings and serve as priests. However, those 11 would not be the only ones to have that privilege. The glorified Jesus appeared to the apostle John in a vision and said: “To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.” (Rev. 3:21, [AV]) Thus, the Kingdom covenant is made with the 144,000 anointed Christians. (Rev. 5:9, 10; 7:4) This is the covenant that forms a legal basis for them to rule with Jesus in heaven. This is similar to a bride from a noble family who might marry a ruling king and come into position to share in his ruling power. In fact, the Scriptures refer to anointed Christians as “the bride” of Christ, “a chaste virgin” promised in marriage to the Christ.—Rev. 19:7, 8; 21:9; 2 Cor. 11:2.
Pronunciation Key - (Tet`ra*gram"ma*ton), and What is its Significance?
[Middle English Tetragramaton, from Greek tetragrammaton, four-letter word, from neuter of tetragrammatos, four-lettered : tetra-, tetra- + gramma, grammat-, letter; see gerbh- in Indo-European Roots.] [The American Heritage(r) Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition ]
It is a noun, that, "four Hebrew letters (usually transliterated as YHWH (Yahweh) or JHVH (Jehovah)) signifying the Hebrew name for God (which the Jews regarded as too holy to pronounce)
[WordNet (r) 1.6, (c) 1997 Princeton University]
Let's examine what various writers had to say about the Tetragrammation, the proper name for Almighty God, usually shown as YHWH or JHVH in English:
"Jehovah (Yahweh): The proper name of God in the Old Testament; hence the Jews called it the name by excellence, the great name, the only name,.... Finally, the word is found even in the "Pugio fidei" of Raymund Martin, a work written about 1270 (ed. Paris, 1651, pt. III, dist. ii, cap. iii, p. 448, and Note, p. 745). PROBABLY THE INTRODUCTION OF THE NAME JEHOVAH ANTEDATES EVEN R. MARTIN. No wonder then that this form has been regarded as the true pronunciation of the Divine name by such scholars as Michaelis [("Supplementa ad lexica hebraica", I, 1792, p. 524), Drach (loc. cit., I, 469-9, Stier (Lehrgebäude der hebr. Sprache, 327), and others."]
What of Michaelis? Johann David Michaelis in his German translation of the Old Testament of the eighteenth century...said in part: "On the other hand, the name Jehovah [ Jehova in German] is used. . . . so I considered it to be a matter of integrity in translation to identify it, even though it might not always be pleasing to the German ear." ....Several of my friends insisted that I not at all insert this foreign word. . . . Jehovah is a Nomen Proprium, and, just as properly as I retain other nomina propria [such as] Abraham, Isaac, Jacob... In the translation of a classical author one would not have the slightest hesitance toward the use of the names Jupiter, Apollo [and] Diana; and why then should the name of the Only True God sound more offensive? I do not therefore see why I should not use the name Jehovah in the German Bible." "How God's Name Was Pronounced? The following from [Biblical Archaeology Review, Mar./Apr. 1995 Volume 21 Number 2; page 30:]
"1) Among the magical papyri the name appears as IAWOUHE (Ya-oh-oo-ay-eh), but it is difficult to know how much this pronunciation had to do with the Tetragrammaton...so it is not certain how many of these syllables were thought to belong to the name. At least, however, it has more syllables than two, and the central vowel is not omitted, as is done in Yah-weh.
"2) Clement of Alexandria spelled the Tetragrammaton IAOAI (Ya-oo-ai), IAOE (Ya-oo-eh), and IAO (Ya-oh). In none of these is the central oo or oh vowel omitted.
"3) Rabbis often deduced the meaning of a word by taking the word apart and interpreting each part...By this logic Clement argued that the Tetragrammaton had the same consonants as the verb "to be," so it meant the one who caused things to be, but he did not pronounce the word according to any form of that verb. His conjecture was homiletic ally thought provoking, but not scientifically or historically correct...Reams of paper and gallons of ink have been expended over the years justifying a pronunciation Westerners deduced on the basis of Clement's conjecture. It may all be irrelevant to the subject....The word spelled Ya-hoo or Ya-hoh may have been pronounced Yahowah or Yahoowah, but in no case is the vowel oo or oh omitted. The word was sometimes abbreviated as "Ya," but never as "Ya-weh." This can be illustrated further by studying the proper names of the Bible that were based on the Tetragrammaton....Yah-ho-na-than..."Yaho-cha-nan"...Eli-yahoo ...Anyone who cares to check the concordances will find that there is no name in the entire Scriptures that includes the Tetragrammaton and also omits the vowel that is left out in the two-syllable pronunciation Rainey upholds.
"There is still one other clue to the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton- Hebrew poetry. For example, from the poem of Exodus 15, read aloud verses 1, 3, 6, 11, 17 and 18, first pronouncing the Tetragrammaton as "Yahweh" and then read it again, pronouncing the same word as "Yahowah." Notice the rhyme and poetic beat of the two. In this way the reader can judge which one is the more likely pronunciation used in antiquity.
"The name "Yahowah" is not a ghost word, as Rainey declared. Clement of Alexandria's conjecture that the Tetragrammaton was based on the verb "to be" overlooks the pronunciation of the proper names in the Scripture that include some portion of the Tetragrammaton. Clement did not have access to the scrolls and may never have seen the Aramaic Papyri. Nevertheless, he spelled the Tetragrammaton in Greek employing the central vowel that Rainey omitted in his determination that the proper name was Yahweh....
The way Rudolf Kittle translates YHWH is more accurate than "Yahweh", he translates it "Yehowah. Why? Became YHWH is a 3 syllable word, not a two syllable word like "Yahweh" is. George Buchanan of Wesley Theological Seminary favors the use of "Yahowah" or "Yahoowah." He explains how he came up with those: "In ancient times, parents often named their children after their deities. That means that they would have pronounced their children's names the way the deity's name was pronounced. The Tetragrammaton was used in people's names, and they always used the middle vowel." A few examples of proper names found in the Bible that include the shortened form of God's name are Jonathan, which appears as Yohnathan or Yehohnathan in Hebrew. It means "Yaho or Yahowah has given." Elijah's name is Eliyah or Eliyahu in Hebrew, which means: "My God is Yahoo or Yahoo-wah." Also, Jehoshaphat is Yehohshaphat meaning "Yaho has judged."
The two syllable pronunciation of YHWH as "Yahweh" would not allow for the "o" vowel sound to exist as part of God's name. But in dozens of Biblical names that incorporate the divine name, this middle vowel sound appears in both the original and the shortened forms, as in Jehonathan and Jonathan. Professor Buchanan says about God's name: "In no case is the vowel oo or oh omitted. The word was sometimes abbreviated as 'Ya,' but never as 'Ya-weh.'... When the Tetragrammaton was pronounced in one syllable it was 'Yah' or 'Yo.' When it was pronounced in three syllables it would have been 'Yahowah' or 'Yahoowa.' If it was ever abbreviated to two syllables it would have been 'Yaho.' " [(Biblical Archaeology Review)]
Gesenius in his Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon of the Old Testament Scriptures agrees saying: "Those who consider that YHWH [Yehowah] was the actual pronunciation are not altogether without ground on which to defend their opinion. In this way can the abbreviated syllables YHW [Yeho] and YH [Yo], with which many proper names begin, be more satisfactorily explained." -[George Wesley Buchanan Professor Emeritus, Wesley Theological Seminary Washington, DC]
However, if the word were spelled with four letters in Moses' day, we would expect it to have had more than two syllables, for at that period there were no vowel letters. All the letters were sounded. At the end of the OT period the
Elephantine papyri write the word YHW to be read either yahu (as in names like Shemayahu) or yaho (as in names like Jehozadek). The pronunciation yaho would be favored by the later Greek from iao found in Qumran Greek fragments (2d or 1st centuries B.C.) and in Gnostic materials of the first Christian centuries. [Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament]
"In the history of the English language however, the letter J has a written counterpart in the German J, although the latter J in German is pronounced like an English Y. The bulk of theological studies having come from the German sources, there has been an intermixed usage in English of the J and the Y. Our English translations of the bible reflect this, so we have chosen to use J, thus Jehovah, rather than Yahweh, because this is established English usage for Biblical names beginning with this Hebrew letters. No one suggests that we ought to change Jacob, Joseph, Jehoshaphat, Joshua etc. to begin with a Y, and neither should we at this late date change Jehovah to Yahweh." -[Bible Translator Jay P. Green, Sr. ]
Girdlestones says: "It is generally agreed that Jehovah [unlike Elohim] is not a generic or class name, but a personal or proper name. Maimonides says this is called the Plain name. [Another] says: It is every where a proper name, denoting the person of God, and Him only; whence Elohim partakes more of the character of a common noun.
"The Hebrew may say the Elohim, the true God, in opposition to all false Gods; but he never says the Jehovah, for Jehovah is the name of the true God only! He says my God, but never my Jehovah; the God of Israel, but never the Jehovah of Israel, for there is no other Jehovah, the living God but never of the living Jehovah. "God's personal existence, the continuity of His dealings with man, the unchange-ableness of his promises, and the whole revelation of his redeeming mercy gather round the name Jehovah. "In the 3rd chapt. of Genesis it may be noted that THE SERPENT AVOIDS THE USE OF THE NAME." [Girdlestones Synonyms of the Old Testament; 36-38:]
"THE NAME "Our help is in the name of YHWH, maker of heaven and earth". Psalm 124,8 "And Moses said to Elohim: behold when I come to the children of Israel and say to them: the Elohim (Almighty One) of your fathers has sent me to you; and they say to me; 'What is His Name?' What shall I say to them? And Elohim said to Moses: EHYEH ASHER EHYEH! (I shall be what I shall be!). And he said: say thus to the children of Israel: EHYEH (I shall be) has sent me to you. And Elohim again said to Moses: Thus shall you say to the children of Israel: YHWH, the Elohim of you fathers, "Elohey Abraham", "Elohey Yishaq" we "Elohey Yaaqob" has sent me to you. This is my Name forever, and this is My Mention to all generations!" Exodus 3:13-15. In these passages, the Creator revealed His Name to Moses and through him to Israel and all mankind. It is important to understand that the Creator's Name is neither a noun nor an adjective. It is a verb! Please note that in verse 14 the Creator refers to Himself as "EHYEH", "I shall be". EHYEH is the first person singular, simple future tense of the Hebrew verb HAYOH or HAWOH, to be. Since ONLY the Creator Himself can say "I shall be", Moses, in verse 15, is finally instructed to refer to Him as YHWH, HE will be; This is the third person singular, simple future of the same verb. As such, its correct pronunciation must be YIHWEH. The popular pronunciation YAHWEH is based on a 5th Century Samaritan usage, YABE or YABHE, which is entirely unintelligible, and without any grammatical or linguistic foundation. The form "YAHWEH" is not the simple future used by the Creator Himself in Exodus 3:14 but the so-called CAUSATIVE and would mean "He who causes to be". The Creator certainly "causes to be", but He gives His Name as the simple future in Exodus 3:14 so we can safely assume that the same Name, in the third person, must also be the simple future and not the causative. (In Hebrew the simple future tense is called "ATID" and the causative "HIF'IL"). Some see in the form YAH (as in Halleluyah) proof for the pronunciation "YAHWEH". Anyone who knows Hebrew knows that the vocalization of the syllable, in both verbs and nouns, changes at times with its position in the word. Thus, the root YHW may be pronounced YAHU at the end of the word (as in ELIYAHU - ELIJAH, GEDALYAHU, YISH'AYAHU etc.) and YEHU at the beginning of a word (as in YEHOSHAFAT, YEHOYADA). Thus the syllable YAH at the END of a word, could be pronounced YEH or YIH at the beginning of a word. These observations are based on Hebrew grammar! If the so-called "YAHWISTS" or Sacred Name groups have a source of information above or beyond this one, let them show it! We are specifically commanded by Scripture to use the true Name of the Creator (see Deuteronomy 6:13; 10:21, Psalms 105:1, First Chronicles 23:12 for only a very few examples.)! According to Joel 3:5 (Hebrew Text) deliverance is to be had ONLY by calling upon this name! Some claim that it is a desecration of the Name to have it used so familiarly. No! It is a desecration to substitute a lesser title (as ADONAY, My Supreme Lord, applied to YHWH 134 times in the Hebrew text, but never to be substituted for YHWH) for the Creator's Name. We would not have been commanded by YHWH Himself to bless and swear by His name if this implied desecration of disrespect. Therefore, walking in the light of this truth, we must realize that there is NO room for the use or mention of any of the names of pagan gods in conjunction with the Name YHWH. Calling upon Jesus - alias YAHSHUA, YESHUA, YAHVAHSHUA, - the master, the "messiah", the unknown god, the trinity, the "son" of god, god the son, etc. is idolatry and incompatible with calling upon YHWH. It is NOT enough to pronounce, those who have taken to themselves ANOTHER (beside YHWH). I shall NOT offer their blood-drink offerings (the lord's supper) nor mention their name with my lips!" Psalms 16:4. "And make no mention of the name of other gods, nor let it be heard out of your mouth!" Exodus 23:13. "The gods that have NOT made the heavens and the earth, these shall perish from the earth and from under the heavens." Jeremiah 10:11."
"Knowing another's name was a special privilege that offered access to that persons thought and life...God favored His people by revealing [his name] which offered special insight into his love and righteousness." [-Illustrated Bi. Dictionary]
It might be added here that the meaning of Jesus, is, according to Weymouth: "Jehovah is Salvation." So every time anyone uses this name, Jesus, (which is not the original pronunciation of it in the 1st century) he is using and supporting the form of The Divine Name JEHOVAH in the N.T.
Appendix on the Tetragrammaton:
No doubt everyone whom you know has a name. God also has a personal name to set him apart from all other gods. "Is not God his name"? some may ask. No, for "God" is merely a title, just as "President, King, or Judge", are titles. We can learn God's name from the Bible, where it appears about 7,000 times in the orininal Bible texts. For example in the KING JAMES Version; Psalm 83:18; Exodus 6:3; Isaiah 12:2
Some persons are surprised to see God's name in their Bibles. This often is because their Bibles are one that seldom uses God's name. The KJV, for example uses God's name by the title "Lord" and "God", it always puts this title in capital letters, as "LORD", which sets it apart from the common words.
But why? you may ask, "is God's name not used in every place that it occurs in the original Bible text? Why are the titles Lord and God generally used in its place? "The American Revisers", after a careful consideration were brought to the unanimous conviction that a "Jewish Superstition", which regarded the Divine Name, as too "sacred" to be uttered, ought no longer to dominate in the English Bibles or any other versions......This personal name with its wealth of sacred associations has been removed from our Bibles.
Yet, think of this, should we use God's name, even though we may not be saying it exactly the way it was originally pronounced? Well, we use the names of other persons in the Bible, even though we do not say them in the way the names were pronounced in the original Hebrew. For example, "Jesus" name is pronounced "Yesh'ua" in Hebrew. Likewise, it is proper to use God's name, which is revealed in the Bible, whether we pronounce it "Yahweh" in Hebrew or "Jehovah" in english, or in some other way common in our language. What is wrong is to "fail" to use these names. Why? Because those who do not use the names of "Jesus" or "Yahweh" could not be identified with the ones whom God takes out to be "a people for his name", Acts 15:14 We should not only know the name of God and his Son, but praise it before others, as Jesus did when on earth. Matthew 6:9; John 17:6,25 Revelation 14:1
[http://anyboard.net/soc/religion/christian/chapel/posts/277.html ]
THIS IS VOL 736B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF COLOSSIANS, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] HYPOCRISY OF RELIGIONS THAT CLAIMS TO BE PEACEFUL BUT PERMIT THEIR MEMBERS TO PROMOTE WAR, [4] AN ARTICLE ON, DOES THE BIBLE COMMENT ON SAME-SEX MARRIAGES?
[5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] HYPOCRISY OF RELIGIONS THAT CLAIMS TO BE PEACEFUL BUT PERMIT THEIR MEMBERS TO PROMOTE WAR:
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [736B]
For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement. 1 Peter 3:5 – 6, [authorized King James Bible; AV]
Yes, wives should be in subjection to their husbands, but their husbands should love them as much as themselves as brought out by Ephesians 5:33, [AV] “Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.” And be not afraid of your advisories per Philippians 1:28, [AV] “And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.”
[3] HYPOCRISY OF RELIGIONS THAT CLAIMS TO BE PEACEFUL BUT PERMIT THEIR MEMBERS TO PROMOTE WAR:
INTRODUCTION:
Both major religions, apostate (counterfeit) Christians that claim to be footstep followers of Christ but are NOT, and Islam both claim to be religions of peace. However, history tells a very different story. The apostate (counterfeit) Christians have promoted Crusades [actually on provocation by Islam.]; genocides such as of the Cathers; burnings at the stake by those they did not like and/or believed differently; 30 year war of religion; enslavement of others such as in Goa, India, and the new world; promotion of wars; etc.
The other, Islam, has done just as bad such as attacking and enslaving most of Spain for six centuries; attacking the Byzantine Empire and stealing all of its lands; an attack on France with a view of taking Paris, the sacking/distruction by Fatimid caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and preventing pilgrimages to Jerusalem; the moving on and wrongly occupying the tribal lands of their brother tribe, the Hebrews, of land given to them for perpetuity by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham; the kidnapping of soldiers of their brother tribe with the sole intent of fomenting strive and destroying world tranquility; the bombing of trains/subways in India, Spain, and London for the same purpose; the 9/11 destruction of the World Trade Center; etc.
Now it should be obvious to all that none of these acts these religions have permitted their members to carry out are in any way in line with their claim to be peaceful religions. Now these acts were/are NOT isolated acts, but part of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) from the top religious leaders. To wit, Popes, bishops, priest, Caliphs, Sultans, Ayatollahs, Kings, Emirs, dictators, presidents, prime ministers, generals, etc.
Let's look at the wrong in a summarized form.
SUMMARIZED WRONG - SIMPLIEST FORM:
Both of these groups by failing to be peaceful religions as they WRONGLY claim have permitted distress to be caused to others [fill in the name]. When the expected resistance/counter offense/defense occurs from the ones being caused distress by their action and/or inaction they either caused directly and/or permitted by them to their members proves distressful to them, they want it lifted. Yet, they make no move or suggestion with respect to lifting the distress their victim is experiencing; what outright hypocrisy.
Peace and tranquility can never exist while groups claiming FALSELY to be peaceful religions, but are NOT, are permitted to exist. This earth can only have peace and tranquility when these groups are finally eliminated, as promised, by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael. Why is this? Well the Bible clearly shows that Satan the Devil is the ruler of this present wicked system per 1 John 5:19, "And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
This will of course occur at the conclusion of this system of things per John 12:31, "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out." (AV).
Some may view this as taking too long given the current warlike condition of the earth, but Matthew 24:14 says, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." (AV). And Matthew 24:37-39 clearly shows this end will come suddenly, "But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." (AV).
Now the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael is NOT slow as some count slowness, but is merciful wanting all to be given a chance as shown at 2 Peter 3:9, "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." (AV); and Isaiah 30:18, "And therefore will the LORD wait, that he may be gracious unto you, and therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy upon you: for the LORD is a God of judgment: blessed are all they that wait for him." (AV).
SOLUTION TO WORLD DISTRESS NOT FROM MEN:
Many look to men to solve world problems, but this can NOT happen as mankind has never learned to value right over wrong, and to peacefully sit together and resolve problems. In fact, with all their world organizations designed to do this, they only make them into one ups-man forms.
We can see this at the moment with respect to the unconscionable affair between Lebanon and Israel. An attack on Israel occurs from Lebanon by an armed Islamic army that Lebanon permits in their country. In this unprovoked attack, eight Israel soldiers are killed and two are kidnapped. Lebanon clearly abdicates its responsibility to bring to justice the wrong doers or to have the kidnapped victims returned.
Israel does the expected and counter attacks, what else would you expect, when Lebanon does NOT ACCEPT its responsibility to make amends, punish the wrong doers it has permitted to use its country to stage attacks on Israel, nor to have the kidnapped victim returned as any right thinking government would do. In effect, they permit the fuse to be and are totally responsible for all that results.
Instead of assuming their responsibility, they go to the United Nations and ask to have a truce called, and try to put the responsibility on Israel. Their filing with the United Nations makes no reference to righting the original wrong or returning the kidnapped victims back to Israel. To wit, they do NOT want to do justice. Why? Because they care NOT about the distress the original aggression they permitted caused to Israel, nor to the continuing distress it is causing.
Clearly Lebanon is the WRONG, not only for not relieving the distress caused Israel, their neighbor, but for proposing a cease fire that solves NOTHING. If they were responsible and caring, they would have done two things, (1) immediately seek to right the wrong and make sure it NEVER occurred again, (2) started negotiating for the right venue, a treaty of peace and friendship with Israel.
Of course, the Bible covered this long ago when it showed that the kingdom of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, not men, would succeed in bring peace at Daniel 2:44, "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." (AV); and Matthew 6:10 in Jesus' (Yeshua's) prayer to his father, the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael.
So what should men be doing now? Well to find out, look at Psalms 2:10-12, "Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. 11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him." (AV).
Face Reality - Hezbollah Started It And Bears Total Responsibility:
INTRODUCTION:
The Middle East is in turmoil today, 07/15/2006. Why? Because Hezbollah does NOT want peace, but wants atrocities and war. Hezbollah is is an organization made up of members of Islam, a religion that claims to be a religion of peace. Yet Hezbollah only promotes hate and continues to promote strive and destroy world tranquility and clearly seeks to impede world peace.
It uses Lebanon as a base of operations to make unprovoked attacks on Israel and to kidnap her citizens. Unfortunately, Lebanon has permitted this wrong doing, and therefore must share in the unpleasant results - too bad as Beirut was once the 'jewel' of the Middle East, a wonderful city.
Now one may ask why does Lebanon want to be an accessory-after-the-fact in Hezbollah's crimes against humanity, and reap the justified whirlwind from Israel for doing so. Maybe they enjoy having punishment brought on themselves and get some other weird perverted enjoyment from it or something. But is this the way affairs should be conducted by individuals that claim to belong to a peaceful religion? All need to think about this and come up with an answer.
THE BIBLE'S VIEW:
Jesus (Yeshua), the Isa, said at Matthew 22:37-40, "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." (Authorized King James Bible; AV); and the Apostle Peter wrote at 1 Peter 3:8-15, "Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous: 9 Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing. 10 For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile: 11 Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it. 12 For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil. 13 And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? 14 But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" (AV).
Now as can readily be seen Hezbollah and its supporters [also members of Islam] are NOT desirous of peace although belonging to a religion that claims to be a religion of peace. Obviously, if they were considered as doing wrong by Islam, then Islam should excommunicate or interdict them from Islam; they have NOT done so.
Of course many members of Islam reject what the Bible says, but is this reasonable considering that their Quran like the Book of Mormon is nothing but a knockoff of the Bible? Now the well known rule of precedence is that the earlier document shall have precedence over the later that used information from it just as the earlier granting of land title takes precedence in any title search or action at law over the later. Many overlook the fact that the Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman as was the Quran and the Book of Mormon. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance putting the thoughts of God (YHWH) into the words of men much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most individal writers can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.
So as can readily be seen, if one is open minded and honest with himself, what is written in the Bible takes precedence over any other guide book that mankind may have.
ALL SHOULD SEEK PEACE AND BE PEACEMAKERS:
Just at the Bible says at Matthew 5:9, "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." (AV), clearly showing that all should seek to be peacemakers and NOT war makers such as is Hezbollah and their evil backers. But as we all well know, many in the middle east can not stand tranquility and peace and when ever things have been relatively peaceful for awhile, they commit some type of atrocity that will bring on a confrontation since their objective is to destroy peace and tranquility. This clearly shows per 1 John 5:19 that their unseen leader is Satan the Devil, "And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness." (AV); and also by 2 Corinthians 4:4, "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (AV).
Actions by evil men and the groups perplexes most of mankind and this is shown clearly in the Bible at Luke 21:10, "Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:" (AV) by the prophecy about our time by none other than Jesus (Yeshua), the Isa; and at 2 Timothy 3:1-5, "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away." (AV). 2 Timothy 3:1-5 clearly is speaking about groups like Hezbollah that claim to belong to a religion of peace along with their backers, but do nothing but ferment war, not peace.
Now let''s look at the truth by means of the world news:
THE FACTS FROM THE WORLD NEWS BY ASSOCIATED PRESS:
The Circumstances:
In an article by Kevin Frayer, AP [07/15/2006]the following salient items appeared.
<<" Neither side showed signs of backing down from the conflict, which erupted Wednesday when Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid. As civilian deaths mounted, diplomatic efforts to end the crisis had yet to get off the ground.>>"
Correct Venue Needed:
In an emotional televised speech, Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora called on the United Nations to broker an immediate cease-fire to end Israel's land, sea and air offensive against Lebanon.">>
Of course a cease-fire is NOT the proper venue because it implies resumption at a future date of violence which is uncalled for. The proper venue would be a treaty of peace in which both nations agree to respect the others right to peace and tranquility and to not permit military groups to remain on their territory, such as Hezbollah that are dedicated to fermenting violence and promoting war. Also, it would call for the return of the kidnapped individuals, turning over the war criminals that committed the kidnapping and killed at least eight individuals during commission of this war crime designed to disturb world peace and tranquility; to wit, the perpetrators should be tried by the international war crimes court.
Even Saudi Arabia Recognizes Who Started The Mess:
<<" President Bush, on a trip to Russia, said it was up to Hezbollah "to lay down its arms and to stop attacking." Arab foreign ministers gathered in Cairo but fell into squabbling after moderate states, led by Saudi Arabia, denounced Hezbollah for starting the fight.">>
And,
<<" Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal called the group's actions "unexpected, inappropriate and irresponsible," telling his counterparts: "These acts will pull the whole region back to years ago, and we cannot simply accept them."
Supporting his stance were representatives of Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Iraq, the Palestinian Authority, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, delegates said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks.">>
Now why does the Arab world not unite and punish Hezbollah and turn over the war criminals who started the mess and bare total responsibility for all the death and destruction to the international war crimes court and give back Israel its citizens who were kidnapped?
World Leaders On The Subject:
<<""In my judgment, the best way to stop the violence is to understand why the violence occurred in the first place," Bush said. "And that's because Hezbollah has been launching rocket attacks out of Lebanon into Israel and because Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers."
Putin said it was unacceptable to try to reach political goals through abductions and strikes against an independent state. "In this context we consider Israel's concerns to be justified," he said. At the same time, he said, "the use of force should be balanced."">>
Clearly they recognize that Hezbollah and their backers are sole responsible for all that is occurring. In fact, the Russian leader Putin clearly said, <<" it was unacceptable to try to reach political goals through abductions and strikes against an independent state.">>
Two Little too Late by Government of Lebanon?:
<<" In an emotional televised speech, Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad ...
He also pledged to reassert government authority all over Lebanese territory - suggesting the possibility of deploying the Lebanese army in the south, which Hezbollah effectively controls. That would meet a repeated U.N. and U.S. demand.">>
He has known of this dysfunctional situation for a long time and failed to take action even though he has been asked repeatedly by the U.N. and others. So he can NOT claim lack of responsibility for the present mess. Its like the authorities continually warning a property owner about a dangerous uncovered well on his property, and then one day a child falling in it and his wondering why he is being held responsible. But what does the Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad do? Basically he cries crocodile tears to the U.N. to do something because of his own failure to heed repeated warnings - how absurd.
Even now, Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad, has NOT attempted to arrest the criminals and return their kidnapped victims and find their organization financially responsibility for all damages done in Israel and his own country. Something must be wrong with him, what I do NOT know.
CONCLUSION:
Level heads among those belonging to a religion that claims to be a religion of peace need to prevail. They need to arrange an objective meeting of all directly involved with the view to getting wrongs undone and coming to agreement on a treaty of peace that goes much further than a mere cessation of belligerent acts. Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and the Palestine squatters need to start working together on the regions problems such as developing the regions economy, the setting up of a regional electrical grid along with Jordan, peaceful commerce between them, joint task force to eliminate terrorist, none permitting of militias and other irregular military groups, and setting up joint fact finding groups. Lebanon is a beautiful country that if they joined with Israel in setting up a joint economic region could soon become a regional economic powerhouse and create many jobs, not just for their respective citizens, but for the Palestine squatters and the Jordanians and the Syrians. The region needs economic development and jobs, not war and infrastructure destroying activity.
THIS IS VOL 737B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF HEBREWS, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] THE MULTITUDE OF FALSE GODS AND BELIEFS: [4] AN ARTICLE ON, DOES GOD APPROVE THE USE OF IMAGES IN WORSHIP? [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND 3] THE MULTITUDE OF FALSE GODS AND BELIEFS:
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [737B]
Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. Exodus 19:5 -6 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
The Law covenant also provided an arrangement for a priesthood, foreshadowing a greater arrangement in the future. (Heb. 7:11; 10:1) In fact, through that covenant, Israel had a unique opportunity and privilege to become “a kingdom of priests,” provided they met the stipulation to obey Jehovah’s laws. Israel, however, failed to meet this requirement. Instead of esteeming the arrival of the Messiah, the primary part of Abraham’s offspring, the nation rejected him. Consequently, God rejected that nation.
Now what did the Law accomplish? Israel’s failure to remain faithful to Almighty God (YHWH) and thus supply all those who would make up a kingdom of priests did not mean that the Law had failed. The Law was to protect the offspring and lead humans to the Messiah. Once the Christ came and was identified, the Law’s role was realized. “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” states the Bible. (Rom. 10:4, [AV])
There exist many false gods and beliefs in the world today, but this article will only deal with a few of these false gods and only one false belief, the celebrating of the birth of the Sun god that wiggled into many religions to corrupt them.
The believers in these false gods get really hostile when the facts expose them for what they are, but honesty requires letting the 'chips-fall-where-they-may.' The same holds for the false practice of celebrating of the birth of the Sun god, called by some Christmas.
We will first consider the false god, Chauta, of the Chewa Religion whose name some of their adherents even wrongly put into the Chickewa Bible in place of the personal name of Almighty God (YHWH).
THE FALSE GOD CHAUTA:
It is believed by members of the false religion, Chewa Religion, that men, women, animals and all living things were created by God (Chiuta, Chauta) at Kapirintiwa, a mountain on the boundary between central Malawi and western Mozambique, during a thunderstorm. As a result of the storm, the rains softened the hard surface, but as it hardened again, their footprints remained engraved in the actual rock.
And while Chauta remains the creator god, the spirits of men and the wild animals converge in everyday life through the great dance (gule wamkulu), where masked forms represent wild animals, human beings, and spirits of the dead. In that sense, the living and the dead are in constant communication through dances, that take place at initiation, funerals, and funeral remembrances.[reference - http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/sub/chewa.html (active on 9/2/2007)].
Even, A translation, the Chickewa Bible - 'Buku Loyera' - used in Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia, renders the Tetragrammation (YHWH) - the name of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham's as "Chauta," the name of a tribal god meaning 'Great One of the Bow.' But the wicked translators of this version claim to be worshipping true God (YHWH) of Abraham when they are not. Their justification for using "chauta" is the fact that most local people use this term to mean god, but in fact this is wrong as there is actually another term for god strictly as a title. Also, they could have and should have used the Tetragrammation (YHWH) - the name of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham.
THE VARIOUS FALSE SUN GODS:
Here are some details on some of these false sun gods inspired by Satan the Devil and the demons to hide the true God, Almighty God (YHWH) from the minds of the people as given by an encyclopedia, <<<" A solar deity (also heliolatry or sun worship), is a god or goddess who represents the sun, or an aspect of it. People have worshipped these for all of recorded history. Hence, many beliefs have formed around this worship, such as the "missing sun" found in many cultures (below). Sun worship is a possible origin of henotheism and ultimately monotheism.
A solar barge (also solar bark, solar barque, solar boat, sun boat) is a mythological representation of the sun riding in a boat. The "Khufu ship", a 43.6 m long vessel sealed into a pit in the Giza pyramid complex at the foot of the Great Pyramid of Giza around 2,500 BC, is a full-size surviving example which may have fulfilled the symbolic function of a solar barque.
Examples include:
* Neolithic petroglyphs have been interpreted as showing solar barges
* The Egyptian god Ra, and later Horus, rides in a solar barge. In the Egyptian myths of the afterlife, Ra rides in an underground channel from west to east every night so that he can rise there the next morning.
The Nebra sky disk has been speculated to feature a depiction of a solar barge [2]
A sun chariot is a mythological representation of the sun riding in a chariot. The concept is younger than that of the solar barge, and typically Indo-European, corresponding with the Indo-European expansion after the invention of the chariot in the 2nd millennium BC.
Examples include:
* Trundholm sun chariot
* Germanic Sol rides in a chariot, drawn by Arvak and Alsvid
* Greek Helios rides in a chariot,[1] see also Phaëton[2]
* Sol Invictus depicted riding a quadriga on the reverse of a Roman coin.[3]
* The Biblical Elijah ascends to Heaven in a Chariot of Fire[4]
* Vedic Surya rides in a chariot, drawn by seven horses
The sun itself was also compared to a wheel, possibly in Proto-Indo-European, Greek heliou kuklos, Sanskrit suryasya cakram, Anglo-Saxon sunnan hweogul (PIE *swelyosyo kukwelos).
Male and female
Although solar deities are generally male enemies of the lunar deity (usually female) sun goddesses are found on every continent. However, some mythologists, such as Brian Branston, therefore contend that sun goddesses are more common worldwide than their male counterparts. They also claim that the belief that solar deities are primarily male is linked to the fact that a few better known mythologies (such as those of ancient Greece and Egypt) rarely break from this rule. The dualism of sun/male/light and moon/female/darkness is found in many (but not all) European traditions that derive from Orphic and Gnostic philosophies, with a notable exception being Germanic mythology, where the Sun is female and the Moon is male. [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]
But the false worship of the sun god that should interest most people today is the Roman religion of Sol Invictus because remnants of it are found in many president day religions such as apostate (counterfeit) Christians, Religion Bahia of Brazil, Baha'i, voodoo religion, etc. Now we shall look at that, <<<" The Roman Empire began their official recognition of sun worship during the time of Aurelian when he instituted the cult of "Sol Invictus". There is virtually no difference between the cult of Sol Invictus and that of Mithraism or for that matter catholicism.
In the year 307 A.D. Emperor Diocletian, a Sun Worshipper, was involved in the dedication of a temple to Mithra, and was responsible for the burning of Holy Scripture (which made it possible for later emperors to formulate Christianity, and thus began the Roman version of the "Universal Christo-pagan Mystery Religion.") After the rein of Diocletian, the Roman Emperor Constantine, who was an early Christo-pagan (Christian) maintained the title "Pontifus Maximus" the high priest of paganism, and remained a worshipper of Apollo. His coins were inscribed: "SOL INVICTO COMITI", which is interpreted as "Committed to the Invincible Sun". During his reign pagan Sun worship was blended with the worship of the True Creator (syncretism), and officially titled "Christianity" by the (less than holy) Roman Empire and its' official church the (less than holy) catholic (universal) church." [source - The Cult of Sol Invictus,
by Dan J. Love, Minister, SCY, http://www.sabbatarian.com/Paganism/SolInvictus.html (on 9/2/2007)]
Now all the various sun gods and other celestial god(s) and their daughter goddesses such as Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat of one celestial moon god most popular in the middle east; the two son gods of a south American celestial moon god, etc. like all other so called celestial god(s) and their off springs are all mythical and have no physical existence.[references - "Islam", by Professor Guillaume, p. 7; Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend; The Religion of the Semites. The Fundamental Institutions (London, 1902), by William Robertson Smith; Hastings' Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics].
WHAT SOME WOULD FALSELY LABEL BLASPHEMY - THE TRUTH ABOUT CHRISTMAS:
As one writer, S. Mortensen, put it, <<<"It is plain that the extravagant follies, the Christmas candles, the Christmas boar, the Christmas goose, the Christmas decoration of the churches, gluttony and drunkenness, yes, even the date of the festival, the twenty-fifth of December, are not only of Roman Catholic, but also of a decidedly pagan origin. Is it not reasonable to demand that Protestants should protest against superstitions which have no foundation in the Bible? The Lord certainly demands it. "Well, they may be right," I hear some one say, "but you are too extreme; many good Christians before our time celebrated Christmas, and even the Reformers did so." But that is no reason why we should continue the practice. Those who began the Reformation could not in such a short time break away from all these traditions. The Lord demands more of us than of them, because we have come into existence in the age of wonderful research and discovery, when knowledge should increase (Dan. 12:4), and the Bible has been in our mother tongue several centuries. In the light of this situation, we would certainly deserve severe criticism for our ignorance if we should continue to honour old traditions or relic worship.[source - Origin and Character of Christmas--No Foundation in the Bible,
By S. Mortensen, (on 9/02/2007 - http://www.nisbett.com/holidays/christmas.htm)]>>>.
And the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge says, <<<"How much the date of the festival depended upon the pagan Brumalia [The December 25 celebration], following the Saturnalia [an eight-day December 17-24 festival preceding it], and celebrating the shortest day of the year and the 'new sun' . . . cannot be accurately determined. The pagan Saturnalia and Brumalia were too deeply entrenched in popular custom to be set aside by Christian influence . . . The pagan festival with its riot and merrymaking was so popular that Christians were glad of an excuse to continue its celebration with little change in spirit and in manner. Christian preachers of the West and the Near East protested against the unseemly frivolity with which Christ's birthday was celebrated, while Christians of Mesopotamia accused their Western brethren of idolatry and sun worship for adopting as Christian this pagan festival." [source -- New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, art: "Christmas."]
So as can be seen, Christmas is just a pagan holiday celebration masquerading as the birth of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ which it definitely is not - are you surprised? If so, go do research on this or anything else in this article and see for yourself that I have let the true facts 'fall where they may.'
THIS IS VOL 738B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF JAMES, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] A CHECK ON THE WORD HELL, [4] AN ARTICLE ON, GOD PROMISES THAT OUR PLANET WILL SURVIVE
[5] A TALKING VIDEO OF, Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] A Check on the Word Hell
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [738B]
Teach me thy way, O LORD, and lead me in a plain path, because of mine enemies. Psalms 27:11, [authorized King James Bible; AV]
The Prophet Jeremiah mentioned how conditions would be, and the need for qualified teachers at 1 Kings 8:36, [AV] “Then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy servants, and of thy people Israel, that thou teach them the good way wherein they should walk, and give rain upon thy land, which thou hast given to thy people for an inheritance.” And, Psalms 25:4, [AV] “Shew me thy ways, O LORD; teach me thy paths.” Highlighted the need to be shown the ways of the Lord. But the Prophet Isaiah showed that all the obedient followers of Almighty God (YHWH) would be per Isaiah 54:13, [AV] “And all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the peace of thy children.”
Many have different concepts of what hell is, but let's consider what the original words commonly translated 'hell' meant in the specific ancient languages.
MEANINGS OF THE WORD 'HELL' IN ORIGINAL LANGUAGES:
First, <<"A word used in the King James Version (as well as in the Catholic Douay Version and most older translations) to translate the Hebrew she´ohl' and the Greek hai'des. In the King James Version the word "hell" is rendered from she´ohl' 31 times and from hai'des 10 times. This version is not consistent, however, since she´ohl' is also translated 31 times "grave" and 3 times "pit." In the Douay Version she´ohl' is rendered "hell" 64 times, "pit" once, and "death" once.
In 1885, with the publication of the complete English Revised Version, the original word she´ohl' was in many places transliterated into the English text of the Hebrew Scriptures, though, in most occurrences, "grave" and "pit" were used, and "hell" is found some 14 times. This was a point on which the American committee disagreed with the British revisers, and so, when producing the American Standard Version (1901) (ASV) they transliterated she´ohl' in all 65 of its appearances. Both versions transliterated hai'des in the Christian Greek Scriptures in all ten of its occurrences, though the Greek word Ge'en·na (English, "Gehenna") is rendered "hell" throughout, as is true of many other modern translations.
Concerning this use of "hell" to translate these original words from the Hebrew and Greek, Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1981, Vol. 2, p. 187) says: "HADES . . . It corresponds to 'Sheol' in the O.T. [Old Testament]. In the A.V. of the O.T. [Old Testament] and N.T. [New Testament], it has been unhappily rendered 'Hell.'"[source - , Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words ]>>.
Second, <<"Collier's Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 12, p. 2 says concerning "Hell": "First it stands for the Hebrew Sheol of the Old Testament and the Greek Hades of the Septuagint and New Testament. Since Sheol in Old Testament times referred simply to the abode of the dead and suggested no moral distinctions, the word 'hell,' as understood today, is not a happy translation." It is, in fact, because of the way that the word "hell" is understood today that it is such an unsatisfactory translation of these original Bible words." [source - Collier's Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 12, p. 2>>.
Third, <<"Webster's Third New International Dictionary, unabridged, under "Hell" says: "fr[om] . . . helan to conceal." The word "hell" thus originally conveyed no thought of heat or torment but simply of a 'covered over or concealed place.' In the old English dialect the expression "helling potatoes" meant, NOT to roast them, but simply to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar." [source - Webster's Third New International Dictionary]>>.
Fourth, <<"The meaning given today to the word "hell" is that portrayed in Dante's Divine Comedy and Milton's Paradise Lost, which meaning is completely foreign to the original definition of the word. The idea of a "hell" of fiery torment, however, dates back long before Dante or Milton." [references - Dante's Divine Comedy and Milton's Paradise Lost]>>.
Fifth, <<"The Grolier Universal Encyclopedia (1971, Vol. 9, p. 205) under "Hell" says: "Hindus and Buddhists regard hell as a place of spiritual cleansing and final restoration." [source - The Grolier Universal Encyclopedia}>>.
Sixth, <<"Islamic tradition considers it as a place of everlasting punishment." The idea of suffering after death is found among the pagan religious teachings of ancient peoples in Babylon and Egypt. Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs depicted the "nether world . . . as a place full of horrors, . . . presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness." Although ancient Egyptian religious texts do not teach that the burning of any individual victim would go on forever, they do portray the "Other World" as featuring "pits of fire" for "the damned." [source references -The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, by Morris Jastrow, Jr., 1898, p. 581; The Book of the Dead, with introduction by E. Wallis Budge, 1960, pp. 135, 144, 149, 151, 153, 161, 200]>>.
Seventh, <<""Hellfire" has been a basic teaching in Christendom for many centuries. It is understandable why The Encyclopedia Americana (1956, Vol. XIV, p. 81) said: "Much confusion and misunderstanding has been caused through the early translators of the Bible persistently rendering the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek Hades and Gehenna by the word hell. The simple transliteration of these words by the translators of the revised editions of the Bible has not sufficed to appreciably clear up this confusion and misconception." Nevertheless, such transliteration and consistent rendering does enable the Bible student to make an accurate comparison of the texts in which these original words appear and, with open mind, thereby to arrive at a correct understanding of their true significance." [source - The Encyclopedia Americana (1956, Vol. XIV, p. 81)]>>.
NOW LET'S LOOK AT THE WORD 'GEHENNA' OFTEN TRANSLATED AS 'HELL':
<<"(Ge·hen'na) [Gr. form of the Heb. Geh Hin·nom', "Valley of Hinnom"].
This name appears 12 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures, and whereas many translators take the liberty to render it by the word "hell," a number of modern translations transliterate the word from the Greek ge'en·na.-Mt 5:22, Ro, Mo, ED, NW, BC (Spanish), NC (Spanish), also the footnotes of Da and RS.
The deep, narrow Valley of Hinnom, later known by this Greek name, lay to the S and SW of ancient Jerusalem and is the modern-day Wadi er-Rababi (Ge Ben Hinnom). (Jos 15:8; 18:16; Jer 19:2, 6; see HINNOM, VALLEY OF.) Judean Kings Ahaz and Manasseh engaged in idolatrous worship there, which included the making of human sacrifices by fire to Baal. (2Ch 28:1, 3; 33:1, 6; Jer 7:31, 32; 32:35) Later, to prevent such activities there in the future, faithful King Josiah had the place of idolatrous worship polluted, particularly the section called Topheth.-2Ki 23:10.
No Symbol of Everlasting Torment. Jesus Christ associated fire with Gehenna (Mt 5:22; 18:9; Mr 9:47, 4, as did the disciple James, the only Biblical writer besides Matthew, Mark, and Luke to use the word. (Jas 3:6) Some commentators endeavor to link such fiery characteristic of Gehenna with the burning of human sacrifices that was carried on prior to Josiah's reign and, on this basis, hold that Gehenna was used by Jesus as a symbol of everlasting torment. However, since Jehovah God expressed repugnance for such practice, saying that it was "a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart" (Jer 7:31; 32:35), it seems most unlikely that God's Son, in discussing divine judgment, would make such idolatrous practice the basis for the symbolic meaning of Gehenna. It may be noted that God prophetically decreed that the Valley of Hinnom would serve as a place for mass disposal of dead bodies rather than for the torture of live victims. (Jer 7:32, 33; 19:2, 6, 7, 10, 11) Thus, at Jeremiah 31:40 the reference to "the low plain of the carcasses and of the fatty ashes" is generally accepted as designating the Valley of Hinnom, and a gate known as "the Gate of the Ash-heaps" evidently opened out onto the eastern extremity of the valley at its juncture with the ravine of the Kidron. (Ne 3:13, 14) It seems obvious that such "carcasses" and "fatty ashes" are not related to the human sacrifices made there under Ahaz and Manasseh, since any bodies so offered would doubtless be viewed by the idolaters as "sacred" and would not be left lying in the valley.
Therefore, the Biblical evidence concerning Gehenna generally parallels the traditional view presented by rabbinic and other sources. That view is that the Valley of Hinnom was used as a place for the disposal of waste matter from the city of Jerusalem. (At Mt 5:30 Ph renders ge'en·na as "rubbish heap.") Concerning "Gehinnom," the Jewish commentator David Kimhi (1160-1235?), in his comment on Psalm 27:13, gives the following historical information: "And it is a place in the land adjoining Jerusalem, and it is a loathsome place, and they throw there unclean things and carcasses. Also there was a continual fire there to burn the unclean things and the bones of the carcasses. Hence, the judgment of the wicked ones is called parabolically Gehinnom."
Symbolic of Complete Destruction. It is evident that Jesus used Gehenna as representative of utter destruction resulting from adverse judgment by God, hence with no resurrection to life as a soul being possible. (Mt 10:28; Lu 12:4, 5) The scribes and Pharisees as a wicked class were denounced as 'subjects for Gehenna.' (Mt 23:13-15, 33) To avoid such destruction, Jesus' followers were to get rid of anything causing spiritual stumbling, the 'cutting off of a hand or foot' and the 'tearing out of an eye' figuratively representing their deadening of these body members with reference to sin.-Mt 18:9; Mr 9:43-47; Col 3:5; compare Mt 5:27-30.
Jesus also apparently alluded to Isaiah 66:24 in describing Gehenna as a place "where their maggot does not die and the fire is not put out." (Mr 9:47, 4 That the symbolic picture here is not one of torture but, rather, of complete destruction is evident from the fact that the Isaiah text dealt, not with persons who were alive, but with "the carcasses of the men that were transgressing" against God. If, as the available evidence indicates, the Valley of Hinnom was a place for the disposal of garbage and carcasses, fire, perhaps increased in intensity by the addition of sulfur (compare Isa 30:33), would be the only suitable means to eliminate such refuse. Where the fire did not reach, worms, or maggots, would breed, consuming anything not destroyed by the fire. On this basis, Jesus' words would mean that the destructive effect of God's adverse judgment would not cease until complete destruction was attained.
Figurative Use. The disciple James' use of the word "Gehenna" shows that an unruly tongue is itself a world of unrighteousness and that one's whole round of living can be affected by fiery words that defile the speaker's body. The tongue of such a one, "full of death-dealing poison" and so giving evidence of a bad heart condition, can cause the user to be sentenced by God to go to the symbolic Gehenna.-Jas 3:6, 8; compare Mt 12:37; Ps 5:9; 140:3; Ro 3:13.
The Biblical use of Gehenna as a symbol corresponds to that of "the lake of fire" in the book of Revelation.-Re 20:14, 15; " [source - Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 1]>>.
CONCLUSION:
We must consider what the original writer, scribe used by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, to put the thoughts of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, into the words of man intended when considering words found in the Bible. Why? Because they, not translations and/or mistranslation, are inspired. The fact that the Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance putting the thoughts of God (YHWH) into the words of men much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most posters on threads on this forum can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.
THIS IS VOL 739B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 1 PETER, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] THE FORGOTTEN OCCUPATIONS THAT NEED TO END: [4] AN ARTICLE ON, BIBLE QUESTIONS ANSWERED, DOES OUR PLANET EXIST FOR A PURPOSE?, [5]A TALKING VIDEO OF Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] THE FORGOTTEN OCCUPATIONS THAT NEED TO END:
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [739B]
He [Jesus] will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it. Isaiah 25:8 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
Yes, Jehovah could rescue Paul. Directly after mentioning “the covering or shroud, at Isaiah 25:7, Isaiah showed at Isaiah 25:8 that Jehovah had made provisions for saving of all of repent mankind. Like a father who removes the cause of his children’s suffering and dries their eyes, Jehovah takes great joy in bringing Adamic death to nothing! In this he has a collaborator. First Corinthians 15:22 reads: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” [AV] Similarly, after Paul asked “Who will rescue me?” he continued: “I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. (Rom. 7:25, [AV]) Plainly, the love that moved Jehovah to create mankind did not grow cold with the rebellion of Adam and Eve. And the one who shared with Jehovah in the work of bringing the first couple into existence did not lose his special fondness for their offspring. (Prov. 8:30, 31) .
It is an interesting fact that in today's world the ones that scream the most about what they call wrongful occupations are indeed the worst offenders the world has ever known. Even what they call occupations are either policing actions that they themselves should have undertaken, but others were forced to undertake due to their failure to police their own or actually where they are actually wrongfully occupying some of the land belonging to a brother tribe.
The policing actions being mentioned are those in Iraq and Afghanistan made necessary due to their inaction against one of their own, Sunni Sheik Usama bin Ladin. They should have taken action against him instead of forcing outsiders into doing the policing action. No instead of stepping up to the plate on this, they protest and scream when others were forced to take action due to their inaction when they should have taken action.
Is this really surprising? No, as they seem to have the inability to distinguish between cause and effect, the results. First a definition of terms to assist the understanding of all.
Cause = Something that brings about an effect or result [source - Webster New Collegiate Dictionary].
Effect = 1. To cause to come into being, 2. To bring about often by surmounting obstacles: accomplish, b. to put into effect. [source - Webster New Collegiate Dictionary].
Result = 1. Something that results as a consequence, issue, or conclusion, [from a cause or action] [source - Webster New Collegiate Dictionary].
Therefor a cause is something that gives rise to effects or results as a consequence. For example, if you light the fuse leading to sticks of dynamite the effect or consequence will be an explosion. How big or destructive the explosion depends on the placement of the dynamite. In an open field, the effect or consequences will be minimal, but in a crowded building the, the effect or consequences could be very significant.
Now this simple principle of cause and effect - the consequences- is something Islam has never been able to understand since the days of Muhammad (pbuh). They have always assumed they can take actions against others, the cause, and that the effects or consequences should be trivial. Of course throughout history this has NOT proved to be the case.
SOME OF THE FORGOTTEN OCCUPATIONS THAT SHOULD END:
Let's deal with some WRONGFUL occupations:
FIRST, What is called Turkey is actually land wrongly occupied by Islam that was taken from the Byzantine Empire and should be given back to them. There is no security issues or any legitimate reason for Islam to remain in Turkey.
SECOND, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, etc. are all parts of greater India originally belonging to the Hindus and the Buddhist now wrongly occupied by Islam which they should get out of. Let's look at the facts, go to,
[1] Data Complied by Hindu scholar Nkgrock on rape, forced conversions, sand stealing, temple destruction, murders, massacres, etc. by members of Islam in India, Pakistan, & Afghanistan. At,
THIRD, The wrongful occupation of parts of Palestine by descendants of Abraham's son Ishmael when all of Palestine was given to the descendants of Abraham's son Isaac to perpetuity. For details, see,
[go to 1] Whose Land Is It? A Study of The Land of Palestine at,
[THIS IS VOL 740B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 2 PETER, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] DID THE MESSIAH SAY THE SACRED NAME? [4] AN ARTICLE ON, A REAL HOPE FOR A BETTER TOMORROW, [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] DID THE MESSIAH SAY THE SACRED NAME?
[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [740B]
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Corinthians 15:22 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
Would the children of Adam and Eve be affected by what their parents had done, i.e., breaking the commandment of Jehovah God? Yes. Romans 5:12 explains: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:.” [AV] The first to die was faithful Abel. (Gen. 4: Then Adam’s other offspring grew old and died. Did they inherit sin as well as death? The apostle Paul answers: “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” (Rom. 5:19, [AV) Sin and death inherited from Adam thus became implacable enemies of mankind, inescapable for imperfect humans. We cannot exactly describe all that was involved in passing on their sad inheritance to Adam’s immediate and more distant offspring, but passed on it was.
Fittingly, the Bible refers to inherited sin and death as “And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the vail that is spread over all nations” (Isa. 25:7, [AV]) This suffocating covering, or shroud, this intricate webwork of condemnation, entraps all people. The question that naturally follows is, as expressed by Paul: “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?* (Rom. 7:24, [AV ).
There are some who believe that the Messiah only referred to Yahweh as "The Father" or believe that Yahushua also believed in the doctrine that states Yahweh's name is too holy to pronounce.
Note, in the scriptures in this article, the real names are substituted for the titles used in the Authorized King James, (AV) as they rightfully should be. To wit, one of the name for Almighty God is "Yahweh, and another is "Jehovah" in English; whereas, for Almighty God"s son,
" Yahushua," and another is "Yeshua" in English. Why the differences because "YHWY" lacks vowels so no one knows for sure how it was pronounced in ancient Israel.
Let us first examine the meaning of the word "name" in scripture. It comes from the Hebrew word "Shem". Here is a definition of this word in the Strong's Lexicon:
Strong's # 8034 Shem; a primitive word [perhaps rather from 7760 through the idea of definite and conspicuous position; compare 8064]; an appellation, as a mark or memorial of individuality; by implication honor, authority, character: - + base, [in-] fame[-ous], name[-d], renown, report.
As we can see from the above definition, Yahweh's name is not only represents His "character" but the Name Yahweh is also "His mark". Therefore the word "Shem"/Name refers to His literal written or spoken name as well as His character. If it did not refer to His literal written and spoken name then one could say that Yahweh does not have a written name at all. But we know that is not true:
Isai 42:8 (AV ) "I am Yahweh: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images. "
According to the above definition, His Name is also is His "memorial of individuality". This definition goes hand in hand with scripture:
Exodus 3:15-(AV And Elohim said moreover to Moses, "Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, Yahweh Elohim of your fathers, the Elohim of Abraham, the Elohim of Isaac, and the Elohim of Jacob, hath sent me to you: this [is] my name for ever, and this [is] my memorial to all generations." Man has set up may memorials for himself such as "The Wall" in Washington DC. If one were to go and desecrate that memorial and replace it with a bunch of different names, this person could expect to receive a great punishment for his crime. Now if we wouldn't desecrate one of man's memorials, then why would anyone want to desecrate Yahweh's Memorial - His Name? Do we have the right to change His name to a title of our own liking? Surely our Messiah would not do this, especially when reading the scriptures in the Synagogue:
Luke 4:17 (NKJV) "nd He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written: 18 "The Spirit of Yahweh [is] upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to [the] poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to [the] captives And recovery of sight to [the] blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed; 19 To proclaim the acceptable year of Yahweh." 20 Then He closed the book, and gave [it] back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." '
Let's examine some of the things the Messiah said concerning His Father's name:
John 5:43 (AV) "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. " Again, we must recognize the dual meaning of the word "Name" here. Not only did He come by His Father's authority, but He also came in His Father's literal written and spoken name. This is proven when we understand the Messiah's name as "Yah-shua" or "Yahweh (is) Salvation".
Peter (in Acts 3) confirmed that the following scripture was speaking of Yahushua:
Deut 18:18 (AV) " I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.19 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him."
This is a direct statement saying that Yahushua did 'speak' in His Father's name. Surely then He did not hide it, substitute it, or change it. He spoke in it. Also it was written of our Saviour:
Psal 118:26 (AV) "Blessed [be] he that cometh in the name of Yahweh.."
So here we have 3 witnesses that Yahushua did come in His Father's name and speak in His Father's name. Nevertheless, lets examine more evidence. In Yahushua's prayer in John 17 He says:
John 17:5 (AV) "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. 6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. " "
And again:
John 17:26 (AV) And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare [it]: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.
This was a fulfillment of scripture in the great Psalm 22:
Psal 22:22 (AV) "I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee. "
Scripture does not lie. If it says that Yahushua declared His name, He had to have done so. He not only declared His Father's literal and spoken name, but also His true character to the people. However, it is evident that not all had "ears to hear" concerning His Father's true character. Not unlike today, they had much baggage (traditions) left over from their Fathers. Yahushua clearly condemned the traditions that were not in line with Yahweh's word. As He had said:
Mark 7:9 (AV) "And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of Elohim, that ye may keep your own tradition. "
One of the traditions was that Yahweh's name was too holy to pronounce.
The question might be asked "Why did Yahushua refer to Yahweh as "Father"? I believe that there are many scriptures that indicate the Messiah was also called "Yahweh" in the old testament. For instance:
Isai 44:6 (AV) "Thus saith Yahweh the King of Israel, and His redeemer Yahweh of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no other."
Because of this, I believe it is possible that one reason Yahushua called Him "Father" was to distinguish Him from Himself. Perhaps I cannot directly prove this. Nevertheless, besides the fact that Yahweh was His Father and this is what He wanted all to know, this is one other possible reason Yahushua often called Him "Father". It is not a wrong thing to call Yahweh by a title that fitly describes Him. The problem lies in replacing, changing and failing to praise, exalt, bless, love, teach, preach, anoint, assemble, believe, give thanks, honor and call on His name as scripture teaches us.
Now let's examine the trial in which Yahushua was sentenced to death.
Matt 26:64-65 (AV) "Yahushua saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. 65 Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. 66 What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death. "
In light of these verses, it is fascinating to study the historical context of what was going on. Based on the above scripture, it is evident that the official charge against the Messiah was "blasphemy". The word "Power" in verse 64 was a popular 'euphenism' or substitution for the divine name Yahweh. Now according to the Mishna:
"He who blasphemes is liable only when he will have fully pronounced the Divine Name. Said R. Joshua ben Qorha, "on every day (of the trial) they examine the wtnesses with a substituted name. When sentence was to be given they did not decalre him guilty of death with the substituted name, but they put everyone out and ask the most important of the witnesses, saying to him, "Say, what exactly did you hear?" And he says what he heard. And the judges stand on their feet and tear their clothing, and they may not mend them again.(m.San. 7:5)"
Therefore, it is evident that historically no man could be sentenced for blasphemy unless he had actually spoken the Divine Name. This is furthur proven when we see that the High Priest "rent his clothes" upon hearing the name since Yahushua was his own witness (as he said "what further need have we of witnesses?").
Finally, there is strong evidence that Yahushua spoke the name aloud in Mt. 4:7; 4:10; 5:33; 21:42; 22:37 & 22:44. The Hebrew version DuTillet has 3 yods in the place of the name "Yahweh" and the Shem Tob has a "Heh" in those places. These all indicate He spoke the name since there is no Hebrew word with a single Heh or 3 consecutive Yod's. This is one of the multitude of attempts to falsify His name by those who believed in the ineffable name doctrine. The ineffable name doctrine states that Yahweh's name is too holy to pronounce. Clement of Alexandria did not hold to this doctrine, but others did like Jerome:
"For no one can utter the name of the ineffable deity; and if any one dare to say that there is a name, he raves with a hopeless madness. (I Apol.,61)"
"But to the father of all, who is unbegotten, there is no name given. For by whatever name he be called, he has as his elder the person who gives him the name. But these words, Father, and Deity, and Creator, and Lord, and Master, are not names but appelations derived from good deeds and functions. (II Apol., 6)"
With this in mind, it is no wonder that the manuscripts we have today do not contain the name. We know that the 'church fathers' quickly apostated from the true Sabbath. It shouldn't be difficult to believe that they also quickly dropped the use of the true name of our Creator. It is very evident that the "ineffable name" doctrine is totally unscriptural. It flies in the face of scriptures like:
Exod 9:16 (AV) "And in very deed for this [cause] have I raised thee up, for to shew [in] thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. "
Isai 52:6a "My people shall know my name.."
Psalms 116:4-AV "Then I called upon the name of Yahweh; O Yahweh, I beseech thee, deliver my soul."
Psalms 116:13-AV "I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of Yahweh."
Psalms 116:17-AV "I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving, and will call upon the name of Yahweh."
Isaiah 12:4-AV "And in that day shall ye say, Praise Yahweh, call upon his name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted."
I think it is better to trust in what the scriptures say concerning His name rather than trusting in the reasoning that "since the greek manuscripts which we have today (which are not original) do not contain the name, it must not be important." The scriptures already have declared the importance of His name. I will close with one final scripture:
Psalms 105:1-AV "O give thanks to Yahweh; call upon his name: make known his deeds among the people."
I believe this last scripture is one of many commandments to call on His name. Why not do so?
[www.eliyah.com/saidname.html]
In addition, I found the following:
The Hebrew word YHWH comes from the Hebrew verb 'to be'. Since Hebrew has no vowels and most of our English sounds and words include vowels, the name has been modified to Jehovah so that we can say it. The Name of God was considered by the ancient Jews to be too sacred to speak, so no one really knows the exact pronunciation of YHWH. The most often pronunciation is "Yahweh" which is close to a simple pronunciation of the letters YHWH.
First, the name Jehovah (YHWH) tells us what God is in Himself-'I AM THAT I AM' or 'I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE' [www.wbpc.org/knowledge_of...d-yhwh.htm]
Also, go to the following link to see signs with the name of God (YHWH) incorporated within them:
www.zionfire.com/page36.html
This Index to The Titles of Deity has been compiled to assist the reader to further his studies in the doctrine of God-manifestation. It will be found useful, not only in connection with the present work, but also in the study of Eureka, an exposition of the Apocalypse, by the author of Phanerosis. Eureka is a work which none of "the servants of God" should be without (see Rev. 1:3). Therein Dr. Thomas deals extensively with the subject of Deity in manifestation.
The Authorised Version (AV) has indiscriminately rendered many of the titles of Deity by the words "Lord" or "God." These words do not express the ideas conveyed in the name Yahweh, or the titles Eloah, Elohim, El, and so forth. By the use of this Index the student will be able to trace the places in his Bible where the different titles occur, and will thus be able to follow the reasoning of Dr. Thomas and other writers upon this subject more easily.
Much of the information contained in the following pages has previously appeared from time to time in Logos. It has been culled from various sources, mainly the writings of Dr. Thomas, and from lexicons and concordances. It is issued without any pretensions to scholarship on the part of the compiler, who claims no real knowledge of the original languages.
Dr. Thomas has transliterated this word as Ail, thus spelling it as it should be pronounced. He writes: "As often as this word Ail passed before the mind of the Hebrew, the idea of POWER, MIGHT, and STRENGTH, would stand out in bold relief." "It always," says Gesenius, "presented to the Hebrews the idea of strength and power." In Eureka, Vol. 1, p.95, Dr. Thomas writes: "Every member of the heavenly host is an Eloah (mighty one), but of all the Elohim (mighty ones) ONE ONLY is the original and self-existent AIL the absolute, omnipotent, and independent power of the universe. Speaking of Himself in His address to the ends of the earth He says: 'Look unto me, for I am AIL, and none else' (Isa. 45:22); and to Israel he saith: 'Ye are my witnesses, and my servant whom I have chosen, that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I, Yahweh, am He; before me AlL or POWER, has not been formed nor after me shall be" (Isa. 43: 10). In a modern literal translation, “You are my witnesses,”q declares Jehovah,“Yes, my servant whom I have chosen,rSo that you may know and have faith in me*And understand that I am the same One.s Before me no God was formed,And after me there has been none.t " (New World Translation Revised: NWTR).
Jesus declared: "I can of mine own self do nothing" (John 5:30). This is true also of the heavenly host. However, with the aid of Ail, (which Power they manifest) "nothing is impossible" (Luke 1:37). El or Ail, therefore, refers to that mighty Power whose work is exhibited in all creation, and whose energy is the basis of all matter for "out of Him were all things made." "Lord," declared the Psalmist, "thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting thou art God (El)" -- Ps. 90:1-2.
According to Young's Index-Lexicon to the Old Testament, El has been translated "God" 212 times; "god" 15 times, "power" three times, "goodly" four times, "mighty" four times, and "idol," "might," "mighty one," "great," "mighty," "strong" once each.
"Another word applied to POWER INCREATE and improperly rendered 'God' is Eloah" (Dr. Thomas). The word is derived from the root El (Power). "POWER, then, is the radical idea of Eloah as well as of El. It is of the singular number and masculine gender" (Dr. Thomas).
Eloah thus signifies a Powerful or Mighty One. In regard to the doctrine of God manifestation, it signifies one who is made strong by Divine power (El). God is Himself Eloah, or a Mighty One, and so are the angels who manifest His power. This idea is expressed in the words recorded by Isaiah: "Exists there an Eloah without Me. Yea, there is no rock (metaphor for power), I know not any" (Isa. 44:. David declared: "Who is Eloah
"save" halhaday,-- "without" or "apart from" -- see Strong's Concordance). David's question can be answered safely in the negative. There is no true strength apart from Yahweh. Man might claim to be Eloah, but his strength is but weakness compared with that of Yahweh, who, as Job remarked, can readily "gather unto Himself His spirit and breath, and all flesh would perish together."
Paul taught that believers are "in hope of the glory of God" (Rom. 5:2), and Peter that "divine nature" will be bestowed upon those who attain unto the "great and precious promises" (2 Pet. 1:4). Each saint attaining unto that position will be an Eloah, or a Mighty One; whilst combined they will constitute Elohim, or Mighty Ones. These titles will be applied to them because they will manifest El or the Divine power. Thus Isaiah represents the nations making supplication unto Cyrus (who was a type of Christ) saying: "Surely God (El - the Divine power) is in thee" (Isa. 45:14).
It is generally acknowledged that Yahweh is the correct pronunciation for the memorial name of God proclaimed at the Bush. Philologists and theologians agree that the term Jehovah, frequently used instead of Yahweh, is a spurious form of the word. In Eureka, vol 1, p.100, Dr. Thomas writes:
"Yahweh or Yah, as a noun, and signifying 'He who will be,' is the memorial name the Deity chooses to he known by among His people. It reminds them that HE will be manifested in a multitude, and that, in that great multitude which no man can number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, which shall stand before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands (Rev. 7:9) -- in each and every one of them, 'He will be the all things in all' (Cot. 15:2; or, as it is expressed in Eph. 4:6, 'there is one Deity and Father of all, Who is above all, and through all, and in you all'."
The word occurs some 6,823 times in the Old Testament. It has been translated "Jehovah" in a few instances (Exod. 6:3; Ps. 83: 18; Isa. 12:2; 26:4; see also Gen. 22:14; Exod. 17:15; Judges 6:24), but most often it has been rendered as LORD or GOD. To indicate the presence of the name of Yahweh in the original text, the translators have printed these words in small capitals. For example, in Ezekiel 38:1, the word LORD appears in small capitals, whereas two verses on (v.3) it is printed in the lower case. In the former verse, the word is Yahweh; in the latter it is Adonai. Again, in Ezekiel 37:27 the word God appears printed in the lower case, whereas four verses on, in Ezekiel 38:3, the same word is printed in small capitals. In the former place the word is Elohim; in the latter it is Yahweh.
Yahweh also occurs in a contracted form as "Yah." Usually the condensed form is used for incorporating the Divine name in proper names, such Joshua (Yahshua), but it also appears in the text of Scripture, an example being found in Psalm 68:4: "Extol Him by His name Yah."
In The Christadelphian for 1881, J. W. Thirtle wrote: "The Name is a Hebrew word of four letters, and is spelled -- Yod, he, vav, he .... Some have wondered how the letter J came to be the initial of the word among us (i.e., the word Jehovah), as well as of the shorter form Yah -- in the common version, Jah. The answer is found in the fact that early translators and commentators wrote in Latin -- a language which has no such letter as Y in it, and those scholars selected J to do duty for the letter they wanted."
These Latin translators and commentators transposed the Memorial Name from Y.H.V.H. to J.H.V.H.. Previous to this, however, the Jews, owing to a misconception of the two passages Exod. 20:7 and Lev. 24:16, placed against these four letters the vowel points of the word rendered in our Bible "Lord," but in Hebrew Adonai. J. B. Rotherham in The Emphasised Bible states: "They intentionally wrote alien words not for combination with the sacred consonants, but for the purpose of cautioning the Jewish reader to enunciate a totally different word, vis., some other familiar name of the Most High." When the Jewish reader came to the words Yahweh Elohim, he would read Adonai Elohim, thus following the vowel points annotated to the text. But in some places, such as Ezekiel 38:10, the words used are Adonai Yahweh. Here, to avoid the repetition of Adonai Adonai, the vowel points of the word Elohim were supplied, and the Jewish reader read Adonai Elohim. Combine the vowel sounds of those words with the four letters, J.H.V.H., and the following combination results: JaHoVaiH, or Jehovah.
At one time, the correct pronunciation of the Name was subject to controversy; but today it is generally accepted that Yahweh is the correct form. Unger's Bible Dictionary states: "The Hebrew tetragrammaton (YHWH) traditionally pronounced Jehovah is now known to be correctly vocalised Yahweh. New inscriptional evidence from the second and first millenia B.C. point toward this fact .... and has commended itself in the light of the phonetic development and grammatical evidence of increased knowledge of Northwest Semitic and kindred tongues .... The Name Yahweh has been found to be unique to Israel and has not been verified as the name of any deity outside Israel."
[Read the following and you will clearly see they are only one in unity, but two distinct spirit beings] The word Elohim is derived from El (Strength or Power) and Alah meaning to bind together as by an oath. Thus the word suggests plurality in unity, whilst Theoi only denotes plurality. The dominant feature of the Elohim is their unity not their plurality. They are made strong by One, even El. Though many, they act in strict conformity with one another as a unit. The idea is perhaps better comprehended by the common use of the word Ecclesia. The later suggests a multitude called out of "every kindred, tongue and nation" and made "one" by the blood of Christ. That unity will be brought to perfection when each member is clothed upon with Divine nature, and thus made really "one" in Christ and in Yahweh (John 17:21). The use of the word Theoi would destroy the fundamental thought of the unity of the Elohim, and would suggest that they are independent beings deriving their power from various sources.
Did Christ use the Divine Name and titles? We are confident that he did. Christ spake in Hebrew (Acts 26:14), and there is strong evidence to suggest that the original gospels were written in that tongue. The fact that Christ spoke in Hebrew is evidenced by the words that are still retained in the text (see Mark 5:41; 7:34, etc.). [ users.aol.com/bible3/phanindc.htm basically from Unger's Bible dictionary]
Now let's cover another topic that appears to give you a lot of problems, but from some new perspectives:
The Jews for Christ Prospective of when he was in heaven before coming to earth:
As Jewish believers in Yeshua, we get many interesting arguments from some of our Jewish people. Many question the Messiah being Lord. Now, we do not say that Yeshua is the Father God, he is the son, who lived over thirty years on earth as a man without sin. We know a man can not live without sin and we acknowledge that the Messiah is also deity.
In our Jewish Holy Scriptures it says that HaShem takes on a human-like form, 'seated up a throne'. Isaiah says, 'My eyes have seen HaShem. He also hears the voice of the L-rd. [" Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts." (Isaiah 6:5 AV) in King James]. We believe in Yeshua there is a single subject, a single 'person', a single 'I'. But that 'person' possesses two 'natures', one human, the other divine. They are both present in Yeshua without mixing. Many people also do not know that ever since the Holy Scriptures were recorded, Jewish people have always believed that the Messiah would be divine. Our book of Daniel in the Holy Jewish scriptures says, "In my vision at night I looked and there was one before me like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into His presence. He was given authority, glory, and sovereign power. All peoples, nations, and men of every tongue worshipped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed." [13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." (Daniel 7:14-15 AV)]. He approached God, was given authority and everyone worshipped him. One like the Son of Man and God allowed him to be worshipped. A kind of worship only given a divine being in the Tanach. In Zechariah the Lord says, "they will look to me whom they have pierced."
Isn't it time you asked the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob if Yeshua is the Messiah of Israel? [www.torahbytes.org/sechel/godman.htm]
As can clearly be seen from the above, Almighty God (YHWH) and Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) were two separate entities in heaven before he came to earth and was born to the Virgin Mary as a flesh and blood male. In the above, Almighty God (YHWH) is pictured as the Ancient of Days [because he always existed, "2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." (Psalms 90:2 AV)], and Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) [a separate entity] approaches hem and was "given authority, glory, and sovereign power" by his clearly showing a superior -subordinate roles between the two. [13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." (Daniel 7:14-15 AV)].
"Yosef (Joseph), son of David, do not be afraid to take Miryam home with you as your wife; for what has been conceived in her is from the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit). She will give birth to a son, and you are to name him Yeshua because he will save his people from their sins." Mattityahu (Matthew) 1:20b-21
Our Messiah was named "Yeshua" for the very thing he was sent to do: to "save [Hebrew: yeshu'ah] his people from their sins." "He was pierced for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquity..." Yeshua died for our sins; he takes sin, become sin itself. God reconciles the world to himself in Messiah, not counting men's sins against them. (Isaiah 53:5, 1 Corinthians 15:3, John 1:29, 2 Corinthians 5:21, 2 Corinthians 5:19)
You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Messiah died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Messiah died for us. Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! Not only is this so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Yeshua HaMashiach, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (Romans 5:6-11, written by a Jewish Pharisee in the first century named Sha'ul)
Yeshua died for us to ransom us for God, to reconcile us to God, thus enabling sinful man to be changed and able to approach Adonai as holy ones, our way to eternal life made clear. Messiah died for our deliverance so that we may die to our sins and live for righteousness once and for all-he did what mere animal sacrifice could picture, but never accomplish. (Hebrews 2:9, Revelation 5:9, Colossians 1:21-22, 2 Timothy 1:10, 1 Timothy 2:3-6; 1 Peter 2:24, Hebrews 9:12-14a) [ www.yeshua.com ]
It is clear in the above that two separate beings are being discussed.
By Dr. James D. Price
Forward by Guy Cramer
The Jewish community has claimed the name of Jesus in Hebrew is Yeshu the traditional Jewish spelling of Jesus. Why do others spell Jesus as Yeshua with four letters and sometimes spell it as Yehoshua with five letters ?
Before we look at the answer lets look at the origin of the name. The sixth book of the Old Testament is called Joshua.
The title of the book is appropriately named after its central figure, Joshua. His original name is Hoshea, "Salvation" (Num.13:; but Moses evidently changes it to Yehoshua, "Yahweh (Jehovah) is Salvation" (Num.13:16). He is also called Yeshua, a shortened form of Yehoshua. This is the Hebrew equivalent of the Greek name Iesous (Jesus). (NKJV, Thomas Nelson Inc.,1980, p.190) [www.direct.ca/trinity/yehoshua.html]
Please carefully note how Jesus's (Jeshua or YHWH saves) came into being and how God's name was also in the name of Joshua. Also, note all references are old testament.
Our Rabbis have taught: Always let the left hand thrust away and the right hand draw near. Not like Elisha who thrust Gehazi away with both his hands (and not like ' Joshua b. Perahiah who thrust one of his disciples away with both his hands).11
Here, the editor's footnote reads:
[(11) MSS. and old editions read Jesus the Nazarene. R. T. Herford sees in Gehazi a hidden reference to Paul. Cf. his Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, pp. 97ff.]
Another interesting passage indicates that the Talmud regarded the changing of the spelling of a name to be a sign of divine disapproval. The following passage discusses the change of a name from Yehoshua to Yoshua. Arachim 32b
And the other?13 - He [Ezra] had prayed for mercy because of the passion for idolatry and he removed it, and his merit then shielded them even as the booth. That is why Scripture reproved Joshua, for in all other passages it is spelt: Jehoshua, but here, Joshua.14
The editor's footnote reads:
[(14) For his failure to implore the Lord to remove the passion for idolatry from the heart of the people. Just as with Abram the enlargement of his name into 'Abraham' was an expression of divine approval, so did this diminution of Jehoshua into Joshua express divine disapproval. The reason for Joshua's failure to implore the Lord to remove the passion for idolatry was his assumption that he possessed the land in its pristine holiness, so that it would in itself help Israel to overcome its idolatrous tendencies.] [ by Dr. Price is Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament at Temple Baptist Seminary in Chattanooga, TN. He holds the following degrees:
B.S. in Electrical Engineering, Purdue University
M.Div. Northwest Baptist Seminary
Ph.D. Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning ]
THIS IS VOL 741B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 1 JOHN, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] HERE IS A COMMENTARY ON EXODUS 20:8 COVERING THE SABBATH, READ AND LEARN ABOUT APOSTASY: [4] AN ARTICLE ON, CAN OUR PLANET SURVIVE? CONDITION OF OCEANS. [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] HERE IS A COMMENTARY ON EXODUS 20:8 COVERING THE SABBATH, READ AND LEARN ABOUT APOSTASY
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [741B]
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. Genesis 2:16 – 17 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
Although they had the prospect of living forever, Adam and Eve were not immortal. To keep living, they had to breathe, drink, sleep, and eat. More important, their lives depended on their relationship with their Life-Giver per Deutermony 8:3, “And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.” [AV] . Accepting God’s guidance would be essential for their continuing to enjoy life. Jehovah made this clear to Adam even before Eve was created.
How? “The tree of the knowledge of good and bad” stood for God’s right to determine ultimately what is good and what is bad. Adam, of course, already had a sense of good and bad; he was created in God’s image and had a conscience. The tree would indicate to Adam and Eve that they would always need Jehovah’s direction. For them to eat of the tree would be to claim moral independence, which would cause enormous damage to them and to the offspring they would produce. God’s command with its penalty conveyed the gravity of such a course.
[3] HERE IS A COMMENTARY ON EXODUS 20:8 COVERING THE SABBATH, READ AND LEARN ABOUT APOSTASY:
Exodus 20:8 Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
INTRODUCTION:
Keeping the Sabbath, on the seventh day, was the Fourth Commandment; which followed the Third Commandment which said, Exodus 20:7, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain." (AV).
PROTESTANT CHURCH ACCEPTED CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, HOOK LINE AND SINKER:
The Protestant church movement came out of the reformation on the basis the Roman Catholic was in gross error, but they accepted many of the wrong beliefs, doctrines, and myths of the Catholic church even when they directly went against the Word of God. Some of these were the Trinity, Christmas (the concept that Christ was born on December 25, which he was not), Sunday is the Sabbath (which it is not), etc. But let's deal just with the matter of the Sabbath or the seventh-day and not the other gross errors that the Protestants accepted as gospel from the Roman Catholics.
Today almost all Protestant churches celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday as we all know. However, Sunday is NOT the seventh-day of the week, but the first day of the week whose name actually means the Sun's day from ancient Roman pagan practices. Are you aware that the same nonsense unsupported arguments employed against the true Sabbath are also used in an attempt to refute the truth with respect God's (YHWH's) name which is often said as Yahweh or Jehovah (Note: there is no 'y' in Latin so many Romans substituted a 'j' where 'y' would have been) in English. Even the Protestant King James Bible at Exodus 20:7 says, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain;" but neglects to use either of his common names in English or the four letters from Hebrew which represent it, YHWH. This is wrong as are those contentions against the Sabbath being on the seventh-day.
Let's consider why the Sabbath was established by Yahweh himself on the seventh-day. This was stated at Genesis 2:2-3, "And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made." (AV); And in the New Testament at Acts 13:42-44 the Sabbath is shown as still in effect, "And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. 43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God. 44 And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God." (AV).
Nowhere does God (YHWH) give man the prerogative to make any day he wants the Sabbath or holy day. However, leaders of an apostate church without any authority from God (YHWH) took it upon themselves to change it at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD from Saturday (the true Sabbath day) to Sunday (the Day of the Sun) so as to compromise with the Roman pagans to please a pagan Roman Emperor, Constantine, a Worshipper of the Unconquered Sun. Why did this emperor want it changed? He wanted the Sabbath day changed to coincide with the holy day of the worshippers of the Unconquered Sun, i.e., Sunday. How and why did he bring about this God (YHWH) defying act?
The reason was the Pagan emperor Constantine needed Christians to salvage his shaky empire. Constantine embraced; howbeit only on his deathbed. However, he saw Christianity as a tool he could use to firm up his shaky empire. To this opportunity for political intrigue, and happy blend of politics and people was the chief triumvirate of Roman gods Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Jupiter was the principal deity of Roman mythology and Juno was the next highest divinity. Minerva, the "offspring of the brain of Jupiter" was regarded as the "personification of divine thought, the plan of the material universe of which Jupiter was the creator and Juno the representative" (*1). Many Pagan ideas, in fact, were incorporated into Christianity. "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it" (*2).
Roman Emperor Constantine needed to make his subjects feel secure if he were to maintain control of the empire; he wanted to rule a unified empire, be it pagan and/or Christian. But first he would have to find a way to end the dispute over the divinity of Jesus-was he a man or God? So he ordered his Christian bishops to meet at Nicaea in 325 A.D. to settle the matter once and for all. To do this, "he made himself the head of the church, and thus the problems of the church became his responsibilities. As a whole the Western Empire with its Roman influence, with some exceptions, had accepted Tertullian and his new theory of the Trinity in the early part of the previous century, but in the East the church adhered more closely to the older formula of baptism in the name of Jesus, or Jesus the Christ. Especially was this true with the Armenians, who specified that baptism "into the death of Christ" was that which alone was essential (*3).
This council went on for a very long time and the emperor worked behind the scene to get support for a Trinity or a Duality and to have the pagan holy day of the Unconquered Sun declared the Sabbath. This effort was not completely successful, but finally he got a majority and declared under imperial degree that this hence forth would be the central doctrinal pillar of the Christian church, which by this time was apostate. Even with this declaration by the emperor himself not all bishops signed the creed. (*4).
So is was the political product of an apostate church, an apostate church that allowed a pagan Roman Emporer, Constantine, to tell it which dogma to accept at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and then have it rammed down their throats as blessed dogma by another Roman Emporer, Theodosius, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. This in direct violation of God's (YHWH's) word found in the Bible " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV), " If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (John 15:19 AV).
The Roman Catholic church even admits that it alone authorized the change. Note: "Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the church [Roman Catholic] outside the Bible" (*5). Also, the proceedings of the Council of Nicea of 325 AD openly declare that they have changed the Sabbath day from Saturday to Sunday. (*6). Also, Dr. Edward Hiscox, the author of 'The Baptist Manual, states, "There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was NOT Sunday.....It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week...where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament." So we can clearly see from a Protestant source that they know the correct day of the week for the true Sabbath, but have accepted the day assigned by an apostate church, while knowing of the wrong, hook-line-and-sinker; thereby, joining and accepting the products of apostasy.
Of course, we can not earn salvation through any special day. Salvation is a gift from God (YHWH) and the Son of God (YHWH), Jesus (Yeshua). He does, however, give this gift to whom he considers worthy due to their obedience, and denies it to the disobedient. The Apostle Paul brought this fact out at Hebrews 5:9, "And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;" (AV); On the other hand, he wrote, 1 Corinthians 6:9, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulteres, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind." (AV).
CONCLUSION:
As can readily be seen, the apostate church on their own switched the Sabbath from the God (YHWH) appointed day of Saturday (which actually means Sabbath as can readily be ascertained if you look at that day in the Spanish language, Sabado) to Sunday (the Day of the Sun) without any authority from God (YHWH) to do so. In other words they usurped God's (YHWH's) exclusive prerogative in an extreme act of defiance and disobedience; And most of the Protestants went along with this brazen act of defiance against the rights of Almighty God (YHWH) and adopted the fruits of this defiant, disobedient act by the apostate church they claim to rail against for themselves. This shows disobedience on the part of all who accept this lie and act of defiance and disobedience.
REFERENCES:
*1 - McClintock & Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. 6
*2 - Lamson, Newton & Durant, Will, "Caesar and Christ," cited from Charles Redeker Caesar and Christ, W. Duran (page 595).
*3 - ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366).
*4 - Payne, Robert, "The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957); BETHUNE-BAKER, J,F. "An Introduction to the Early History of Christian Doctrine". Methuen; 5th Ed., 1933 and ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366); David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, "De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitone" [Latin](The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son, and Holy spirit), 1566 A.D.; Eklof, Todd F., "David's Francis Tower, Strength through Peace," (06-16-02); The New Encyclopedia Britannica: " Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126. (1976); Parkes, James, "The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity," 1960; Durant, Will. "Caesar and Christ." New York: Simon. 1944. Vol. 3 of The Story of Civilization. 11 vols. 1935-75.
*5 - Catholic Verginian, October 3, 1947.
*6 - Proceedings of the First Great Church Council at Nicea in 325 AD.
THIS IS VOL 742B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEO AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND AN A voice VIDEO TO INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF 2 JOHN, AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY: [3] DISCOURSE ON MATTHEW 12:8, "FOR THE SON OF MAN IS LORD EVEN OF THE SABBATH DAY." (Authorized King James Bible; AV). [4] AN ARTICLE ON, THE STORAGE CAPACITY OF DNA,. [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [12 THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] DISCOURSE ON MATTHEW 12:8, "FOR THE SON OF MAN IS LORD EVEN OF THE SABBATH DAY." – FOLLOW UP TO VOL 741B SHOWING THAT SATURDAY IS THE TRUE BIBLICAL SABBATH.
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [742B]
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 1 Corinthians 15:26 (Authorized King James Bible; AV)
WHEN they were created, Adam and Eve had no enemies whatsoever. They were perfect humans who lived in a paradise. They enjoyed a close relationship with their Creator as his son and daughter. (Gen. 2:7-9; Luke 3:3 Their life prospects were indicated in the very commission God gave them. At Genesis 1:26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” [AV] could be accomplished in a certain amount of time. But to continue to ‘have in subjection every living creature that is moving on the earth,’ Adam and Eve would need to live forever, Adam never having to abdicate his oversight by dying.
However, unfortunately Adam did not get the opportunity to carry out this commission as he disobeyed by braking the command given to him at Genesis 2:16 – 17, “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” [AV] .
[3] DISCOURSE ON MATTHEW 12:8, "FOR THE SON OF MAN IS LORD EVEN OF THE SABBATH DAY." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
This is a scripture that the un-steadfast wrestle with which is warned against at 2Peter 3:17, "Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness." (AV). Basically it breaks down into two distinct phases with respect understanding this scripture. They are as follows:
FIRST, This scripture clearly shows that Jesus (Yeshua) has been made Lord of the Sabbath day which some take to mean that he is the same individual as his Father, Almighty God (YHWH). But of course this is not so, and the scripture in no way signifies this. In fact, nowhere did his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) ever claim to be the Lord of the Sabbath. Let's look at several Old Testament scriptures on this subject and learned scholars comments on them.
[1] Genesis 2:3, "And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made."
Now a comment on same by Robert Jamieson, D.D. from his ". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible."
"Genesis 2:2-7, THE FIRST SABBATH.
2. and he rested on the seventh day--not to repose from exhaustion with labor (see Isaiah 40:2 but ceased from working, an example equivalent to a command that we also should cease from labor of every kind.
3. blessed and sanctified the seventh day--a peculiar distinction put upon it above the other six days, and showing it was devoted to sacred purposes. The institution of the Sabbath is as old as creation, giving rise to that weekly division of time which prevailed in the earliest ages. It is a wise and beneficent law, affording that regular interval of rest which the physical nature of man and the animals employed in his service requires, and the neglect of which brings both to premature decay. Moreover, it secures an appointed season for religious worship, and if it was necessary in a state of primeval innocence, how much more so now, when mankind has a strong tendency to forget God and His claims?" [source - Jamieson, Robert, D.D. "Commentary on Genesis 2". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory
on the Whole Bible". 1871].
[2] Exodus 16:23 "And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.
Now a comment by John Wesley on Exodus 16:23.
"Here is a plain intimation of the observing a seventh day sabbath, not only before the giving of the law upon mount Sinai, but before the bringing of Israel out of Egypt and therefore from the beginning. If the sabbath had now been first instituted, how could Moses have understood what God said to him, Exodus 16:4, concerning a double portion to be gathered on the sixth day, without making any express mention of the sabbath? And how could the people so readily take the hint, Exodus 16:22, even to the surprize of the rulers, before Moses had declared that it was done with regard to the sabbath, if they had not had some knowledge of the sabbath before? The setting apart of one day in seven for holy work, and in order to that for holy rest, was a divine appointment ever since God created man upon the earth." [source - Wesley, John. "Commentary on Mark 2". "John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible". 1765.].
[3] Psalms 118:24, "This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it." (AV).
Comments by scholar A.R. Fausset from his "Commentary on Psalms 118.24. This is the day--or period distinguished by God's favor of all others." [source - Fausset, A. R., A.M. "Commentary on Psalms 118". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible". 1871].
SECOND, For those who think that Jesus (Yeshua) is the same spirit being as his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) because Matthew 12:8 calls him the Lord of the Sabbath, they willfully forget the fact that after he proved himself when tempted by the Devil in Matthew the 4 th. Chapter that his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) gave him much authority such as being the Judge over all as shown at John 5:22, "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:" (AV).
In addition, his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) made him the ONLY mediator between himself, God (YHWH), and man as clearly stated at 1 Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (AV). This scripture once more showing clearly that they are two distinct spirit beings. One, Almighty God (YHWH) being superior to the other, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. How so? His Father, Almighty God (YHWH) made him the ONLY mediator between himself, God (YHWH) and mankind clearly showing his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) was the superior as his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) put him into that position.
Last, His Father, Almighty God (YHWH) gave him authority over all things except himself as clearly shown by 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, "For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (AV).
Bible Scholar Iris the Preacher in a Commentary on "Commentary on why Jesus (Yeshua) can not be God" said.
"A scripture just amplifying what is said at 1 Corinthians 15:21-28, "For since by man [came] death, by man [came] also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; then they that are Christ's, at his coming. 24 Then [cometh] the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be abolished is death. 27 For, He put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evident that he is excepted who did subject all things unto him. 28 And when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may be all in all." (ASV), which plainly says, "Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father;" Once more showing that he is a distinct individual from his Father (YHWH) and that all things he had were given to him by his Father. How misguided can the misguided become?" (ASV). Once more showing that he is a distinct individual from his Father (YHWH) and that all things he had were given to him by his Father. How misguided can the misguided become?
So to sum it up, we see how misguided ones are blinded to reality per 2 Corinthians 4:4, "in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn [upon them]." (ASV), and Isaiah 6:10, "Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they sea with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn again, and be healed." (ASV). No wonder they do not see the obvious. Therefore study the Bible with a view to understanding and not lean on your own understanding per Proverbs 3:5, "Trust in Jehovah with all thy heart, And lean not upon thine own understanding:" (ASV)." [source - "Commentary on why Jesus (Yeshua) can not be God" by Iris the Preacher, 2001]
And also the following in another "Commentary on Nehemiah 9:6" said,
"Nehemiah 9:6 Thou Art Jehovah, even thou alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all things that are thereon, the seas and all that is in them, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee. (American standard Version; ASV)
This scripture deals with how Almighty God (YHWH) made heaven and the earth. To start off, he first made a master worker who was the first born or first of preeminence, the Son of God, whom we know as Jesus (Yeshua), and used him as his master worker or agent in the creation of all else, see Colossians 1:15-16, "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him and unto him;" (ASV); and used this master worker or agent in the creation of all else, see , Colossians 1:17-18, "and he is before all things, and in him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19 For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in him should all the fullness dwell;" (ASV). This is in keeping with the Jewish Law of Agencies and is basically as follows, "Jesus (Yeshua) was God's (YHWH's) appointed agent in accordance with the 'Biblical law of agency' described as, "Scripture mentions something being done by Person A, whilst another mentions it being done by Person B. This is best understood when we grasp the Schaliach Principle, or the Jewish Law of Agency, which is expressed in the dictum, "A person's agent is regarded as the person himself." Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principle." (The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, R.J.Z. Werblowski and Geoffrey Wigoder).
Now let's see who the Bible says is above all else, i.e., the supreme one, at Isaiah 37:16, "And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye say to your master, Thus saith Jehovah, Be not afraid of the words that thou hast heard, where with the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed me." (ASV); And the corresponding testimony at Revelation 14:7, "and he saith with a great voice, Fear God, and give him glory; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made the heaven and the earth and sea and fountains of water." (ASV); Now he will NOT be doing the judgment personally, but again using his only begotten son, Jesus (Yeshua) as his appointed agent to do this as recorded at 1 Corinthians 15:22-28, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (AV), testifies that God (YHWH) had given his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) over all except himself when the scripture says "it is manifest that he is excepted."
We note that at Jesus (Yeshua) here is foretold as carrying out God's (YHWH) assignment to him in relation to judgment and the end of the world or system, and has given Him power over all as his agent, except over Himself as recorded at 1 Corinthians 15:27 recorded above. Also, 1 Corinthians 15:28 shows that after Jesus (Yeshua) has subdued or subjected all, He will, "then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." This is very important to know as it shows, first, that Jesus (Yeshua), the Son of God, is a separate or distinct being or individual from his Father, Almighty God (YHWH), and second, he is subordinate to him as a superior one and is His agent for accomplishing all tasks related to the earth at the present time; hence, they are NOT CO-EQUAL as some misguided ones try to claim to support their false doctrine or myth of them being one-and-the-same and/or simply different manifestations of the same being." [source - "Commentary on Nehemiah 9:6" by Iris the Preacher, 2001]
Now, Let's look at several New Testament scriptures on this subject and learned scholars comments on them.
[1] Mark 2:27 "And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: " (AV).
The renown reformer of the 18th. Century, John Wesley, in his "Commentary on Mark 2" said.
"2:27 The Sabbath was made for man - And therefore must give way to man's necessity." [source - Wesley, John. "Commentary on Mark 2". "John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible". 1765.]
This comment by John Wesley on Mark 2:27 was most profound as it clearly showed that the Sabbath was made for man; therefore, it was fitting that Jesus (Yeshua) be appointed over the Sabbath as well as all else, except himself, by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH), since he, Jesus (Yeshua) was made the Judge over all mankind by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH).
[2] Luke 6:5, "And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath." (AV).
Now the Bible Scholar, John Gill, in his "John Gill's Exposition of the Bible" said,
"Luke 6:5
And he said unto them...
He adds this at the close of the instances he gave, at the end of his vindication of his disciples, and discourse with the Pharisees, as a full answer to their cavils;
that the son of man is Lord also of the sabbath;
and may do what he will, and suffer his disciples to do whatever he pleases on that day." [source - Gill, John. "Commentary on Luke 6:5". "John Gill's Exposition of the Bible". 1999].
This commentary by John Gill is similar to John Wesley's on Mark 2:27 and is once more most profound as it clearly showed that the Sabbath was made for man; therefore, it was fitting that Jesus (Yeshua) be appointed over the Sabbath as well as all else, except himself, by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH), since he, Jesus (Yeshua) was made the Judge over all mankind by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH).
[3] John 5:17, "But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." (AV).
Now the Bible Scholar, John Gill, in his "John Gill's Exposition of the Bible" said,
"John 5:17
But Jesus answered them...
Being convened before them, and charged by them with the violation of the sabbath, he vindicated himself in the following manner, saying;
my Father worketh hitherto:
he who is my Father, not by creation, or adoption, but by nature, though he ended all his work on the seventh day, and rested from what he had done; yet he did not cease from working at all, but has continued to work ever since, on sabbath days, as well as on other days; in upholding and governing the world, in continuing the species of beings, and all creatures in their being; in providing for them, and in dispensing the bounties of his providence to them; in causing his sun to shine, and showers of rain to descend on the earth; and in taking care of, and protecting even the meanest of his creatures: and much more men; and still more his own people:
and I work;
or "also I work"; as the Syriac and Arabic version reads; i.e. in conjunction with him, as a co-efficient cause in the works of providence, in the government of the world, in upholding all things in it, in bearing up the pillars of the earth, in holding things together, and sustaining all creatures: or I also work in imitation of him, in doing good both to the bodies and souls of men on the sabbath day, being the Lord of it: I do but what my Father does, and therefore, as he is not to be blamed for his works on that day, as none will say he is, no more am I. So Philo the Jew says {b},
``God never ceases to work; but as it is the property of fire to burn, and of snow to cool, so of God to work.''
And what most men call fortune, he calls the divine Logos, or word, to whom he ascribes all the affairs of providence." [source - Gill, John. "Commentary on John 5:17". "John Gill's Exposition of the Bible". 1999].
[4] Matthew 12:1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
Now the Bible Scholar, John Gill, in his "John Gill's Exposition of the Bible" said,
"At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn,
&c.] That is, the corn fields, as the other evangelists express it. It being on a sabbath day, it is very probable, that Christ and his disciples were going to some public place of worship, the way to which lay through some fields of corn, which were now ripe: for Luke says, it was on the "second sabbath after the first", or rather "the first sabbath after the second"; that is, the first sabbath after the second day of the passover, when the sheaf of the first fruit was offered, and harvest was begun.
And his disciples were an hungered;
it being in the morning before they had broke their fast; and this circumstance is mentioned to show the reason of the following action, and to excuse it: at which the Pharisees were so much offended, and of which they accused them, as having done what was very criminal:
and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat;
Luke adds, "rubbing them in their hands"; and so here in the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions, it is rendered, "they began to rub": as they passed along, they plucked off the ears of corn, either barley or wheat, and rubbed them in their hands, to get the grain clear of the husk, or beard, and eat them; contenting themselves with such mean and unprepared food, when the Jews on that day fed on the best of dainties." [source - Gill, John. "Commentary on Matthew 12:1". "John Gill's Exposition of the Bible". 1999].
Gill, John. "Commentary on Matthew 12:1". "John Gill's Exposition of the Bible". <http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/
gil.cgi?book=mt&chapter=012&verse=001>. 1999.
[5] Hebrews 4:4, "For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works." (AV).
The Renown Bible Scholar A.R. Fausset, A.M. in his "Commentary on Hebrews 4" said,
"God did rest the seventh day--a rest not ending with the seventh day, but beginning then and still continuing, into which believers shall hereafter enter. God's rest is not a rest necessitated by fatigue, nor consisting in idleness, but is that upholding and governing of which creation was the beginning [ALFORD]. Hence Moses records the end of each of the first six days, but not of the seventh." [source - Fausset, A. R., A.M. "Commentary on Hebrews 4". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible". 1871].
CONCLUSION:
As can readily be seen, Almighty God (YHWH) appointed his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ over all except himself for a period of time; therefore, he could rightly be called the Lord of the Sabbath, a title that his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) never took for himself. That he was appointed by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) is clearly shown by John 5:22, 1 Timothy 2:5, and 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, all of which were previously quoted and discussed.
Therefore, we can see two distinct things as follows:
[A] That Jesus (Yeshua) was appointed overall things, except Almighty God (YHWH), by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) a superior one. How so? Only a superior can appoint a subordinate over things under his control.
[B] That Jesus (Yeshua) is a distinct individual separate and apart from his Father, Almighty God (YHWH), and is in no way his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) as some mistakenly claim.
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2024 12:57 am Post subject: SCRIPTURE OFTHEDAY
THIS VOL 767B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEOS AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, AND ANOTHER INTERESTING TALKING VIDEO [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY, AND AN INTRODUCTION TO BOOK OF SONG OF SOLOMON: [3] SOME ARE IGNORANT OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN OBJECTIVE RESEARCHER AND A PROPAGANDIST: [4] A READING VIDEO ON, I GAVE UP ON RELIGION+,, [5] A TALKING VIDEO OF Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] SOME ARE IGNORANT OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN OBJECTIVE RESEARCHER AND A PROPAGANDIST:
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [767B]
I will give you insight and instruct you in the way you should go. I will give you advice with my eye upon you. Psalmss 32:8 [New World Translation Revised: NWTr]
When parents watch their children play, they are often amazed by the inborn abilities the young ones have. Can you confirm that from your personal experience? One child may appear to have natural agility or athletic ability, while a sibling seems more at ease with board games or some art or craft. But regardless of their children’s gifts, parents find pleasure in discovering their potential.
Almighty God (YHWH) too takes a keen interest in his earthly children. He sees his modern-day servants as “And I will shake all the nations, and the precious things of all the nations will come in; and I will fill this house with glory,” says Jehovah of armies. (Hag. 2:7, [NWTr] ) They are precious particularly because of their faith and devotion.
[3] SOME ARE IGNORANT OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN OBJECTIVE RESEARCHER AND A PROPAGANDIST:
INTRODUCTION:
Some are ignorant of the difference between an objective researcher and a propagandist and this article seeks to lay this difference bare.
An objective researcher go out and digs out the facts wherever they may be found and then presents them in the most honest way possible. He/she does not cherry pick his sources by going to only sources written by ones of like belief. In fact an objective researcher tries to go to either neutral sources and/or sources which definitely do not believe as he/she does, i.e. to be objective.
Whereas, a propagandist seeks to cherry pick his sources by using only those written by someone of his/her same belief. This can readily be seen in much of Islamic writing, they cherry pick from only sources written by people who believe the same as they do. Now of course any writings based on this method are biased and none objective.
AN EXAMPLE OF IGNORANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE:
As stated in the introduction, a researcher is objective and does not cherry pick his/her sources; whereas, a propagandist does. Now let's look at some actual examples of ignorance with respect what an objective researcher does where the researcher was actually criticized for being objective and NOT picking writings of those who believed the same as the researcher.
<<<"It looks as if [[objective researcher]] did not do her research on the man she quoted and called a world reknown Bible scholar. [[objective researcher]] did not know that the person she was quoting from (Matthew Henry), believed in the Divinity of Jesus, that He is the True God. [[objective researcher]] does not believe this, she believes Jesus is a mere man and not Divine at all.
She is embarrased by this and therefore attacks my church and then spews forth a bunch of scripture that she thinks somehow will take the focus off of her ignorance.
[[objective researcher]] totally ignored the fact that she used a source that contradicted her own beliefs.
Here is the verse and the commentary by Matthew Henry regarding the fact that Jesus Christ ...............is GOD. The link to his proof points follows.[source - someone not knowing the difference between a researcher and a propagandist]>>>.
Clearly showing the fact that the person this individual who is ignorant of the difference between a researcher and a propagandist. He clearly showed, without realizing it, that the researcher was not cherry picking and being completely objective as shown by the his/her use of items by renown scholars who believed differently than himself/herself. The researcher answered this bit of nonsense as follows.
<<<"[[ individual who is ignorant of the difference between a researcher and a propagandist]] is completely wrong as I well knew that Matthew Henry was a mainstream religionist and that point alone made him a desirable person to quote as even he well knew the facts I was trying to bring out, and no one could say he believed as I do. Likewise I often quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia for the same reason. It shows even better the truth one is trying to bring out when you can show experts on the other side are in agreement with you, especially when you are dealing with a cultist.">>>.
This individual who is ignorant of the difference between a researcher and a propagandist went on to make the following false accusation.
<<<" yet she did the equivelent, out of not knowing what he taught. she is an opportunist propogandist.'">>>.
Other equally ignorant individuals make equally dumb statements such as,
<<<'You do not know Islam">>>.
After the mention of an event in the Netherlands,
<<<" The outspoken former Dutch legislator deserves the protection her country promised before she ran for parliament.
By Sam Harris and Salman Rushdie, October 9, 2007
As you read this, Ayaan Hirsi Ali sits in a safe house with armed men guarding her door. She is one of the most poised, intelligent and compassionate advocates of freedom of speech and conscience alive today, and for this she is despised in Muslim communities throughout the world. The details of her story bear repeating, as they illustrate how poorly equipped we are to deal with the threat of Muslim extremism in the West.
Hirsi Ali first fled to the Netherlands as a refugee from Somalia in 1992 after declining to submit to a forced marriage to a man she did not know. Once there, in hiding from her family, she began working as a cleaning lady. But this cleaning lady spoke Somali, Arabic, Amharic, Swahili, English and was quickly learning Dutch, so she soon found work as a translator for other Somali refugees, many of whom, like herself, were casualties of Islam. These women had been abused, mutilated, denied medical care and proper educations and forced into lives of sexual subjection and compulsory childbearing.
After attending the University of Leiden, Hirsi Ali began speaking publicly about the repression of women under Islam, and shortly thereafter she started receiving death threats from local Muslims. Her security situation eventually became so dire that she moved to the U.S. in 2002. However, she was soon contacted by Gerrit Zalm, then deputy prime minister of the Netherlands, who urged her to run for parliament. When Hirsi Ali voiced her security concerns, Zalm assured her that she would be given diplomatic protection wherever and whenever she needed it. She returned to the Netherlands with this assurance, won a seat in parliament and became a tireless advocate for women, for civil society and for reason.
The rest of her story is well known. In 2004, Hirsi Ali collaborated with Theo van Gogh on the film "Submission," which examined the link between Islamic law and the suffering of millions of women under Islam. The reaction from the Muslim community was nothing short of psychopathic, and it confirmed the necessity of Hirsi Ali's work and the reasonableness of her fears. Van Gogh, having declined bodyguards of his own, was gunned down and nearly decapitated on an Amsterdam street, and a letter threatening Hirsi Ali was staked to his chest with a butcher knife.
Hirsi Ali was immediately forced into hiding and moved from safe house to safe house, sometimes more than once a day, for months. Eventually, her security concerns drove her from the Netherlands altogether. She returned to the U.S., and the Dutch government has been paying for her protection here -- that is, until it suddenly announced last week that it would no longer protect her outside the Netherlands, thereby advertising her vulnerability to the world.
Hirsi Ali may be the first refugee from Western Europe since the Holocaust. As such, she is a unique and indispensable witness to both the strength and weakness of the West: to the splendor of open society and to the boundless energy of its antagonists. She knows the challenges we face in our struggle to contain the misogyny and religious fanaticism of the Muslim world, and she lives with the consequences of our failure each day. There is no one in a better position to remind us that tolerance of intolerance is cowardice.
Having recapitulated the Enlightenment for herself in a few short years, Hirsi Ali has surveyed every inch of the path leading out of the moral and intellectual wasteland that is traditional Islam. She has written two luminous books describing her journey, the most recent of which, "Infidel," has been an international bestseller for months. It is difficult to exaggerate her courage. As Christopher Caldwell wrote in the New York Times, "Voltaire did not risk, with his every utterance, making a billion enemies who recognized his face and could, via the Internet, share information instantaneously with people who aspired to assassinate him."
The Dutch Parliament will be debating Hirsi Ali's case this week. As it stands, the government's decision to protect her only within the borders of the Netherlands is genuinely perverse. While the Dutch have complained about the cost of protecting Hirsi Ali in the United States, it is actually far more expensive for them to protect her in the Netherlands, as the risk to her is greatest there.
There is also the matter of broken promises: Hirsi Ali was persuaded to run for parliament and to become the world's most visible and imperiled spokeswoman for the rights of Muslim women, on the understanding that she would be provided security for as long as she needed it. Zalm, in his capacity as both the deputy prime minister and the minister of finance, promised her such security without qualification. Most shamefully, Jan Peter Balkenende, the Dutch prime minister, has recommended that Hirsi Ali simply quit the Netherlands and has refused to grant her even a week's protection outside the country, during which she might raise funds to hire security of her own. Is this a craven attempt to placate local Muslim fanatics? A warning to other Dutch dissidents not to stir up trouble by speaking too frankly about Islam? Or just pure thoughtlessness?
The Dutch government should recognize a scandal in the making and rediscover its obligation to provide Hirsi Ali with the protection she was promised.
There is not a person alive more deserving of the freedoms of speech and conscience we take for granted in the West, nor is there anyone making a more courageous effort to defend them.
Sam Harris is the author of "The End of Faith" and "Letter to a Christian Nation." Salman Rushdie is a novelist whose works include "Midnight's Children," which won the Booker Prize, and "The Satanic Verses.">>>.
And this same individual then said the news is biased.
The reality is either an event occurred and/or it did not occur. With respect an event, there is no necessity to know about the doctrines of a religion - it either happened or it did not happen.
Being objective is the accepting of reality per John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
THE PROPAGANDIST:
The propagandist on the other hand almost always uses biased material written by people of the same belief. A quick reading of almost any Catholic or Islamic article clearly shows this as sources are almost always by members of the same group - hence none objective.
CONCLUSION:
As stated in the introduction and now shown to be true by example, An objective researcher go out and digs out the facts wherever they may be found and then presents them in the most honest way possible. He/she does not cherry pick his sources by going to only sources written by ones of like belief. In fact an objective researcher tries to go to either neutral sources and/or sources which definitely do not believe as he/she does, i.e. to be objective.
Whereas, a propagandist seeks to cherry pick his sources by using only those written by someone of his/her same belief. This can readily be seen in much of Islamic writing, they cherry pick from only sources written by people who believe the same as they do. Now of course any writings based on this method are biased and none objective.
THIS VOL 768B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEOS AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, AND ANOTHER INTERESTING TALKING VIDEO [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY, AND AN INTRODUCTION TO BOOK OF ISAIAH; [3] DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY: (PART 1) [4] A READING VIDEO ON, PEACE ON EARTH—HOW WILL IT COME? [ 5] A TALKING VIDEO OF Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE?
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY: (PART 1, PART 2 IS 769B)
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [768B]
The judges will thoroughly investigate, and if the man who testified is a false witness and has brought a false charge against his brother, 19 you should do to him just as he had schemed to do to his brother, and you must remove what is bad from your midst. Deuteronomy 19:18 – 19 [New World Translation Revised: NWTr]
Require honesty in court proceedings. The penalty for lying in court in Biblical times, gave pause to all involved: So if a man lied in court to take another’s inheritance, he stood to lose an equal amount. If he lied to have someone that he knew was innocent put to death, he would forfeit his own life. This guideline was a strong motivation to speak the truth.
[2] DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY: (PART 1)
INTRODUCTION:
Originally there was only one classification for genuine (true) followers of Christ, but after the great falling away that had been foretold early on in the Bible this changed drastically as now there became two definitions or classifications of Christians. Now look at the two definitions (1) and (2).
Christian = a term used in two very distinct and mutually exclusive ways.
(1) A genuine (true) worshiper who worships the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Issac, Ishmael, Noah, Moses, etc., the creator of all there is, in strict conformity with Exodus 20:3, an absolute monotheist, a real follower of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ in practice and not just in name.
(2) One who belongs to any of the denominations and/or sects that fell away from genuine (true) Christianity after the passing of the apostles that was foretold by 2Thessalonians 2:3, "let no man beguile you in any wise: for it will not be, except the falling away come first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition," (American Standard Version; ASV), one who worships other god(s) not mentioned as a true god in the Bible such as the Trinity. [source for both definitions - An Important Point on False Religion,
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=babylonthegreat&thread=1190172986 ]
This great falling away that occurred at the end of the first Century after the death of the last Apostle was foretold in the Bible in warnings given by the inspired writers as follows:
2 Timothy 2:3, "let no man beguile you in any wise: for it will not be, except the falling away come first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition," (American Standard Version; ASV).
[or as the (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB) renders it, "If we suffer, we shall also reign with him. If we deny him, he will also deny us." ]
Hebrews 3:12, "Take heed, brethren, lest haply there shall be in any one of you an evil heart of unbelief, in falling away from the living God:" (ASV).
[or as the (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB) renders it, "Take heed, brethren, lest perhaps there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, to depart from the living God."]
The Bible then goes on to show those falling away would go on to make false prophets and teachers for themselves at 2 Timothy 4:3-4,
"For the time will come when they will not endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts;
4 and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside unto fables." (ASV).
[or as the (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB) renders it, "For there shall be a time when they will not endure sound doctrine but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers having itching ears:
4 And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables." ]
This falling away did not consist of just one group falling away, but those who fall away were many separate groups which became the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the Nestorians (Assyrian Church of the East), the Copts (Coptics), etc.
Various ones of these falling away groups claimed infallibility for their leaders based on Apostolic Succession or some other wrong concept, i.e., they behaved as cults in having a leader for whom infallibility was claimed on one false theory or another such as direct communication with a deity or ex Cathedra which will be later explained.
Let's look, now, a little deeper into what constitutes a cult.
WHAT CONSTITUTES A CULT:
Let's first look at how the dictionary, Funk & Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary, defines a CULT as follows: (noun)
1. A system of religious rites and observances; the cult of Aphrodite. 2. Zealous devotion to a person, ideal, or thing. 3. The object of this devotion.[source - Funk & Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary]
The distinguishing features of a cult that are exclusive to cults are:
1 - A charismatic or appointed leader or prophet for which infallibility, either all the time or under special conditions is claimed on the basis of direct communications with a deity or on the basis of ex Cathedra (from the chair of Peter).
2 - Zealous devotion/dedication to a point beyond reason where the end justifies the mean, and such atrocities as genocide, burning others at the stake, giving members or others poison to drink, vicious bombings, etc. are conducted at the leaders direction or instigation. These terrible actions are4 not seen as wrong by the true cultist of which many claim and believe they are winning God's (YHWH's) approval by such wicked acts; of course they are not.
3 - The rejection of the authority of the Bible in favor of their own writings by men and/or unauthorized additions to the Bible Canon of Apocrypha or other books and/or parts of books of very doubtful character such as the Book of Mormon, etc.
4 - The making of their own prophecies instead of sticking to and trying to understand the prophecies that God (YHWH) inspired and had over 40 faithful men write down per 2 Timothy 4:3-4 previously quoted.
5 - The prophesizing or predicting of dates for the culmination of the end times when even Jesus (Yeshua) was not given the date by his Father (YHWH), see Matthew 24:36, "But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only." (American Standard Version; ASV).
6 - An unreasonable attention and/or demand for money without justification of need and amassing of property in excess of that needed for religious functions such as the ownership of a gun factory in Italy that makes military rifles.
Unfortunately, there are those individuals that try and paint groups they do not like as cults when infact the group is NOT a cult. In other words, they use the term in a wrong manner to falsely accuse the innocent in complete violation of Jesus' (Yeshua's) statement at Matthew 22:37-40, "And he said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second like [unto it] is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 40 On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets." (ASV)..
This anti-Christian act should not be a surprise to the true Christians, the obedient footstep followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ who look to him for their salvation. The Apostle Paul was falsely accused as shown at Acts 24:12-15, " and neither in the temple did they find me disputing with any man or stirring up a crowd, nor in the synagogues, nor in the city. 13 Neither can they prove to thee the things whereof they now accuse me. 14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the Way which they call a sect, so serve I the God of our fathers, believing all things which are according to the law, and which are written in the prophets; 15 having hope toward God, which these also themselves look for, that there shall be a resurrection both of the just and unjust." (ASV); And at Acts 24:1-9, "Festus therefore, having come into the province, after three days went up to Jerusalem from Caesarea. 2 And the chief priests and the principal men of the Jews informed him against Paul; and they besought him, 3 asking a favor against him, that he would send for him to Jerusalem; laying a plot to kill him on the way. 4 Howbeit Festus answered, that Paul was kept in charge at Caesarea, and that he himself was about to depart [thither] shortly. 5 Let them therefore, saith he, that are of power among you go down with me, and if there is anything amiss in the man, let them accuse him. 6 And when he had tarried among them not more than eight or ten days, he went down unto Caesarea; and on the morrow he sat on the judgment-seat, and commanded Paul to be brought. 7 And when he was come, the Jews that had come down from Jerusalem stood round about him, bringing against him many and grievous charges which they could not prove; 8 while Paul said in his defense, Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar, have I sinned at all. 9 But Festus, desiring to gain favor with the Jews, answered Paul and said, Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things before me?" (ASV). So should true Christians be surprised when they are falsely accused, of course not at the Devil maneuvers those he has already ensnared to do his dirty work as shown at Ephesians 6:12, "For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual [hosts] of wickedness in the heavenly [places]. " (ASV).
Therefore, all true footstep followers of the lamb, Jesus, should be ready to answer false accusers as shown at 1 Peter 3:15-18, "but sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord: [being] ready always to give answer to every man that asketh you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, yet with meekness and fear: 16 having a good conscience; that, wherein ye are spoken against, they may be put to shame who revile your good manner of life in Christ. 17 For it is better, if the will of God should so will, that ye suffer for well-doing than for evil-doing." (ASV). Remember that the Apostle Paul foretold the end times would be difficult at 2 Timothy 3:1-3, "But know this, that in the last days grievous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, haughty, railers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 without natural affection, implacable, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, no lovers of good," (ASV).
Therefore true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ will be subject to attack and false accusations by those controlled by Satan; in fact, this type of action will be an identifying feature of those mentioned at 2 Timothy 3:1-3, previously quoted. This is vividly shown at Mark 14:55-59, "Now the chief priests and the whole council sought witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found it not. 56 For many bare false witness against him, and their witness agreed not together. 57 And there stood up certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, 58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands. 59 And not even so did their witness agree together." (ASV). When this occurred to the savior of true Christians, the Son of God (YHWH), Jesus (Yeshua); so sure it will also occur to his true followers. In fact, the identifying feature of true Christians will be they will be subject to false accusations and persecution as testified to a 2 Timothy 3:12-13, "Yea, and all that would live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and impostors shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived." (ASV). Remember, what occurred to Stephen a disciple of Jesus (Yeshua) our savior as recorded at Acts 7:58-60, "and they cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon [the Lord], and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. 60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep." (ASV). This has always been the way of Satan and those who he has gained the mastery over as testified to at Psalms 27:12, "Deliver me not over unto the will of mine adversaries: For false witnesses are risen up against me, And such as breathe out cruelty." (ASV).
Now let's look at one such well known cult, the RCC.
EXAMINATION OF THE FALSE INFALLIBILITY CLAIM OF ONE WELL KNOWN CULT:
One individual belonging to this cult said, <<<" Did Jesus not give his apostles infalliblity? Did they not write the infallible NT and pass the Truth down infallibly for 400 years before the bible was canonized?">>>.
Clearly this individual did not know the difference between infallibility and inspired for a special and limited purpose as clearly shown by the post of one poster.
Now let's look at being inspired for a special purpose rather than being given infallibility:
Some are obviously ignorant of the fact that the Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance putting the thoughts of God (YHWH) into the words of men much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most posters on threads on this forum can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.
To wit, the Bible is the ONLY book God (YHWH) ever inspired men to write as his scribes. In other words, God is its author and men only put his thoughts given to them by divine inspiration into their own words, the words of men. Not only that, all the other writers of later so called religious guidance books borrowed from it and made changes in accord with their strong man or so called prophet. Take the example of Joseph Smith who borrowed from it to write the Book of Mormon, but failed to give credit or source to the Bible and twisted some borrowed things into bizarre distortions. Other examples are of course the bizarre writings of David Koresh the Prophet of the Branch Dividians of Waco, Texas; and the Qur'an.
Being inspired to put the thoughts of Almighty God (YHWH) into the words of men in no way implies a general infallibility. General infallibility would require real direct two way communications with Almighty God (YHWH); whereas, being inspired for a special task would not.
But, now, let's look at this cult's claim for their leader using some of their own publications, in this case, The Catholic Encyclopedia:
<<<" Ex Cathedra
Literally "from the chair", a theological term which signifies authoritative teaching and is more particularly applied to the definitions given by the Roman pontiff. Originally the name of the seat occupied by a professor or a bishop, cathedra was used later on to denote the magisterium, or teaching authority. The phrase ex cathedra occurs in the writings of the medieval theologians, and more frequently in the discussions which arose after the Reformation in regard to the papal prerogatives. But its present meaning was formally determined by the Vatican Council, Sess. IV, Const. de Ecclesiâ Christi, c. iv: [b]"We teach and define that it is a dogma Divinely revealed that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the Divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves and not from the consent of the Church irreformable."[[Pope is infallibile when speaking ex Cathedra due to Divine redemmer willed that his church should...clearly a statement claiming direct guidance by a deity and this in their own publications]] [source - from the Catholic Encyclopedia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05677a.htm on 10/15/2007].
And,
<<<" Infallibility
In general, exemption or immunity from liability to error or failure; in particular in theological usage, the supernatural prerogative by which the Church of Christ is, by a special Divine assistance, preserved from liability to error in her definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals. In this article the subject will be treated under the following heads: [[same claim of direct assistance by a divine person made by the Pastor of the Jonestown situation]] [source - from the Catholic Encyclopedia]
And,
<<<"ORGANS OF INFALLIBILITY
Having established the general doctrine of the Church's infallibility, we naturally proceed to ask what are the organs through which the voice of infallible authority makes itself heard. We have already seen that it is only in the episcopal body which has succeeded to the college of Apostles that infallible authority resides, and that it is possible for the authority to be effectively exercised by this body, dispersed throughout the world, but united in bonds of communion with Peter's successor, who is its visible head and centre. During the interval from the council of the Apostles at Jerusalem to that of their successors at Nicaea this ordinary everyday exercise of episcopal authority was found to be sufficiently effective for the needs of the time, but when a crisis like the Arian heresy arose, its effectiveness was discovered to be inadequate, as was indeed inevitable by reason of the practical difficulty of verifying that fact of moral unanimity, once any considerable volume of dissent had to be faced. And while for subsequent ages down to our own day it continues to be theoretically true that the Church may, by the exercise of this ordinary teaching authority arrive at a final and infallible decision regarding doctrinal questions, it is true at the same time that in practice it may be impossible to prove conclusively that such unanimity as may exist has a strictly definitive value in any particular case, unless it has been embodied in a decree of an ecumenical council, or in the ex cathedra teaching of the pope, or, at least, in some definite formula such as the Athanasian Creed. Hence, for practical purposes and in so far as the special question of infallibility is concerned, we may neglect the so called magisterium ordinarium ("ordinary magisterium") and confine our attention to ecumenical councils and the pope."
[source - the Catholic Encyclopedia].
All taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia - a source biased towards Roman Catholic Church (RCC), but
Clearly showing this group to be a cult since it has a leader for whom infallibility is claimed and/or ascribed.
FALSE CLAIMS BY MEMBERS OF CULTS:
One individual, a member of the RCC cult said,
<<<"the entire church believed in the true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist previous to the rise of satans helper martin luther." it was unanimous throughout all of christendom.">>>.
An outright untruth as at no time did the genuine (true) followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ ever believe in this.
Now what is this false doctrine of the Eucharist that is nowhere mentioned in the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH), the Bible? Let's look at an RCC cult source for an explanation,
<<<" The name given to the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar in its twofold aspect of sacrament and Sacrifice of Mass, and in which Jesus Christ is truly present under the bread and wine.
Other titles are used, such as "Lord's Supper" (Coena Domini), "Table of the Lord" (Mensa Domini), the "Lord's Body" (Corpus Domini), and the "Holy of Holies" (Sanctissimum), to which may be added the following expressions, and somewhat altered from their primitive meaning: "Agape" (Love-Feast), "Eulogia" (Blessing), "Breaking of Bread", "Synaxis" (Assembly), etc.; but the ancient title "Eucharistia" appearing in writers as early as Ignatius, Justin, and Irenæus, has taken precedence in the technical terminology of the Church and her theologians. The expression "Blessed Sacrament of the Altar", introduced by Augustine, is at the present day almost entirely restricted to catechetical and popular treatises.
This extensive nomenclature, describing the great mystery from such different points of view, is in itself sufficient proof of the central position the Eucharist has occupied from the earliest ages, both in the Divine worship and services of the Church and in the life of faith and devotion which animates her members.
The Church honors the Eucharist as one of her most exalted mysteries, since for sublimity and incomprehensibility it yields in nothing to the allied mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation. These three mysteries constitute a wonderful triad, which causes the essential characteristic of Christianity, as a religion of mysteries far transcending the capabilities of reason, to shine forth in all its brilliance and splendor, and elevates Catholicism, the most faithful guardian and keeper of our Christian heritage, far above all pagan and non-Christian religions. [[Note, mysteries is the term used for these false doctrines nowhere found in the Inspired Word of Almighty God, the Bible]].
The organic connection of this mysterious triad is clearly discerned, if we consider Divine grace under the aspect of a personal communication of God. Thus in the bosom of the Blessed Trinity, God the Father, by virtue of the eternal generation, communicates His Divine Nature to God the Son, "the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father" (John 1:1, while the Son of God, by virtue of the hypostatic union, communicates in turn the Divine Nature received from His Father to His human nature formed in the womb of the Virgin Mary (John 1:14), in order that thus as God-man, hidden under the Eucharistic Species, He might deliver Himself to His Church, who, as a tender mother, mystically cares for and nurtures in her own bosom this, her greatest treasure, and daily places it before her children as the spiritual food of their souls. Thus the Trinity, Incarnation, and Eucharist are really welded together like a precious chain, which in a wonderful manner links heaven with earth, God with man, uniting them most intimately and keeping them thus united. By the very fact that the Eucharistic mystery does transcend reason, no rationalistic explanation of it, based on a merely natural hypothesis and seeking to comprehend one of the sublimest truths of the Christian religion as the spontaneous conclusion of logical processes, may be attempted by a Catholic theologian.[[It was the life force of Almighty God (YHWH) that was placed in the womb of the virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit and not that of Almighty God (YHWH) per Matthew 1:18-25,
" Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost. 19 Whereupon Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing publicly to expose her, was minded to put her away privately. 20 But while he thought on these things, behold the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost. 21 And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins. 22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: 23 Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. 24 And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife. 25 And he knew her not till she brought forth her first born son: and he called his name Jesus." (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB), and Jesus (Yeshua) is shown as the Son of God per the following verses from the (DRCB),
Matthew 4:3 And the tempter coming said to him: If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
Matthew 4:6 And said to him: If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down, for it is written: That he hath given his angels charge over thee, and in their hands shall they bear thee up, lest perhaps thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Matthew 8:29 And behold they cried out, saying: What have we to do with thee, Jesus Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?
Matthew 14:33 And they that were in the boat came and adored him, saying: Indeed thou art the Son of God.
Matthew 26:63 But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest said to him: I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us if thou be the Christ the Son of God.
Matthew 27:40 And saying: Vah, thou that destroyest the temple of God and in three days dost rebuild it: save thy own self. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.
Matthew 27:43 He trusted in God: let him now deliver him if he will have him. For he said: I am the Son of God.
Matthew 27:54 Now the centurion and they that were with him watching Jesus, having seen the earthquake and the things that were done, were sore afraid, saying: Indeed this was the Son of God.
Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
Mark 3:12 Thou art the Son of God. And he strictly charged them that they should not make him known.
Mark 15:39 And the centurion who stood over against him, seeing that crying out in this manner he had given up the ghost. said: Indeed this man was the son of God.
Luke 1:35 And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Luke 4:3 And the devil said to him: If thou be the Son of God, say to this stone that it be made bread.
Luke 4:9 And he brought him to Jerusalem and set him on a pinnacle of the temple and said to him: If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself from hence.
Luke 4:41 And devils went out from many, crying out and saying: Thou art the son of God. And rebuking them he suffered them not to speak; for they knew that he was Christ.
Luke 22:70 Then said they all: Art thou then the Son of God? Who said: You say that I am.
John 1:34 And I saw: and I gave testimony that this is the Son of God.
John 1:49 Nathanael answered him and said: Rabbi: Thou art the Son of God. Thou art the King of Israel.
John 3:18 He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 5:25 Amen, amen, I say unto you, that the hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
John 5:28 Wonder not at this: for the hour cometh wherein all that are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Son of God.
John 6:69 (6-70) And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.
John 9:35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out. And when he had found him, he said to him: Dost thou believe in the Son of God?
John 10:36 Do you say of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world: Thou blasphemest; because I said: I am the Son of God?
John 11:4 And Jesus hearing it, said to them: This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God: that the Son of God may be glorified by it.
John 19:7 The Jews answered him: We have a law; and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.
John 20:31 But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name.
And many more.]].
The modern science of comparative religion is striving, wherever it can, to discover in pagan religions "religio-historical parallels", corresponding to the theoretical and practical elements of Christianity, and thus by means of the former to give a natural explanation of the latter. Even were an analogy discernible between the Eucharistic repast and the ambrosia and nectar of the ancient Greek gods, or the haoma of the Iranians, or the soma of the ancient Hindus, we should nevertheless be very cautious not to stretch a mere analogy to a parallelism strictly so called, since the Christian Eucharist has nothing at all in common with these pagan foods, whose origin is to be found in the crassest idol- and nature-worship. What we do particularly discover is a new proof of the reasonableness of the Catholic religion, from the circumstance that Jesus Christ in a wonderfully condescending manner responds to the natural craving of the human heart after a food which nourishes unto immortality, a craving expressed in many pagan religions, by dispensing to mankind His own Flesh and Blood. All that is beautiful, all that is true in the religions of nature, Christianity has appropriated to itself, and like a concave mirror has collected the dispersed and not infrequently distorted rays of truth into their common focus and again sent them forth resplendently in perfect beams of light.
It is the Church alone, "the pillar and ground of truth", imbued with and directed by the Holy Spirit, that guarantees to her children through her infallible teaching the full and unadulterated revelation of God. Consequently, it is the first duty of Catholics to adhere to what the Church proposes as the "proximate norm of faith" (regula fidei proxima), which, in reference to the Eucharist, is set forth in a particularly clear and detailed manner in Sessions XIII, XXI, and XXII of the Council of Trent.
The quintessence of these doctrinal decisions consists in this, that in the Eucharist the Body and Blood of the God-man are truly, really, and substantially present for the nourishment of our souls, by reason of the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, and that in this change of substances the unbloody Sacrifice of the New Testament is also contained. [source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
A good reference for more details is Mainstream Religion More Influenced By Pagan Philosophers Than The Bible: [http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=christianity&thread=1178644270&page=1 on 10/15/2007]
Let's take a more in-depth look at the differences between the two entirely different groups that are called Christian than that given in the introduction.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO CLASSIFICATIONS OF CHRISTIANS:
<<<" As usual, most posters show their ignorance with regard the two classifications of so called Christians.
While the Apostles were on earth, there was only one classification of Christian, but shortly after their departure a great many so called Christians fell away from being genuine (true) followers of Christ and this was foretold to pass at Romans 16:17, "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them." (American Standard Version; ASV).
Let's look into this brake and its results,
Most religions of the world take a two part single path as they have some good and some bad. However, so called Christianity did NOT follow in the mold of other religions such as the Hindus, Islam, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, etc. Instead, so called Christianity took two different paths. These two paths are as follows:
[1] In 325 AD the greater part of the so called Christian faith went apostate to when the good favor of a pagan emperor, a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun. And this branch of apostate Christians went on to commit many atrocities such as the rape of Goa, the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the burning of individuals at the stake for disagreeing with them including one Bruno for simply saying that the earth revolved around the sun; whereas, they said the sun revolved around the earth.
[2] A second and much smaller group of Christians that remained genuine Christians and did NOT go apostate, but followed in the footsteps of Christ their leader and savior. These did NOT commit any atrocities.
Thus, as can be readily seen, Christianity did not take the same path as most other religions that of having some good and some bad, but instead had a bad large group, and a much smaller good group. The colonial powers, however, brought the bad group to India, Pakistan, the New World [most of South America and North America], and many of the islands of the sea; and they went on committing atrocities in all of these places. This was because the apostate Christians were actually doing Satan the Devils' work per 2 Corinthians 4:4, "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (Authorized King James Bible; AV); and John 5:19, "And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
Wrong Opinion Held By Many:
Due to the wrong actions, atrocities, committed by the first group, the apostate Christians, "[1] In 325 AD the greater part of the so called Christian faith went apostate to when the good favor of a pagan emperor, a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun. And this branch of apostate Christians went on to commit many atrocities such as the rape of Goa, the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the burning of individuals at the stake for disagreeing with them including one Bruno for simply saying that the earth revolved around the sun; whereas, they said the sun revolved around the earth." Many hold wrong opinions of ALL Christians. Why? Because they have generalized the actions and wrongs of the first group and incorrectly applied them to genuine footstep followers of Christ also, the "[2] A second and much smaller group of Christians that remained genuine Christians and did NOT go apostate, but followed in the footsteps of Christ their leader and savior. These did NOT commit any atrocities."
Of course this generalization results in a wrong understanding of Christianity on the part of many. One writer who did NOT understand the crucial difference between these two groups said,
"You use one bunch of Christians to expose the bullsh**t propagated by another bunch of Christians. All of the Christians are more than 50% crap."
Clearly showing he had no comprehension of the two different paths taken by so called Christianity.
Another writer, in this case a Hindu, showed the same lack of comprehension with respect the two different paths taken by so called Christianity and said.
"You just using counterfeit christianity as a tool to dissaccociate yourself from the same christians that commited the most horrendous attrocities, live with it, you all have blood stained on your hands, I admit I am ashamed of what the brahmins, what's dont is done, we are doing what we can to uplift the dalits."
Obviously this individual also does not understand that so called Christianity took two different paths, and is NOT being rational either as he has shown that he can not bear to hear the truth, the facts? Well let's look at the counterfeit side of Christianity and the atrocities they have committed, and maybe individual like these two will start to realize the truth with respect the two different paths so called Christianity took.
Now the Apostolic Succession false doctrine is that the 12 apostles have successors to whom authority has been passed by divine appointment. In the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the bishops as a group are said to be the successors of the apostles, and the bishop of Rome, the Pope, is claimed to be the successor of Peter. It is maintained that the Roman pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position and perform the functions of Peter, to whom Christ is said to have given primacy of authority over the whole church, but this is really not the case, and is NOT SUPPORTED BY THE BIBLE.
Let's take the first argument of the RCC that Peter was the 'rock' on which the church was built when in reality the 'rock' was Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Let's now consider whom the Apostles Peter and Paul understood to be the 'rock,' the 'cornerstone as shown at Acts 4:8-12, " Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said to them: Ye princes of the people and ancients, hear. 9 If we this day are examined concerning the good deed done to the infirm man, by what means he hath been made whole: 10 Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible). And this is further testified to at 1 Peter 2:4-8, " Unto whom coming, as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men but chosen and made honourable by God: 5 Be you also as living stones built up, a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 6 Wherefore it is said in the scripture: Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious. And he that shall believe in him shall not be confounded. 7 To you therefore that believe, he is honour: but to them that believe not, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner: 8 And a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal, to them who stumble at the word, neither do believe, whereunto also they are set."(DRCB); And further affirmed that Jesus (Yeshua) is the 'rock' at Ephesians 2:20, " Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:"(DRCB).
Last we look at Matthew 16:18 which the RCC tries to twist its meaning to be that Peter is the 'rock,' but as we have seen already, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the 'rock,' " And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."(DRCB) clearly affirming that he, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ was the 'rock' to Peter, so no apostolic succession here.
THIS VOL 769B - Part 2 of 768B COMBINATION OF (1) INTERESTING VIDEOS AND TALKING SHOWING WONDERS OF ALMIGHTY GOD’S CREATION, AND ANOTHER INTERESTING TALKING VIDEO [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND A LINK TO A BIBLE STUDY, AND AN INTRODUCTION TO BOOK OF JEREMIAH; [3] DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY: (PART 2) [4] A READING VIDEO ON, ASTROLOGERS VISIT JESUS, [ 5] A TALKING VIDEO OF Is TRUTH IMPORTANT ANYMORE? [6] PHOTOGRAPH OF DIFFERENT BANANA TYPES.
COMBINATION OF [2] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [3] DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY: (PART 2)[PART 1 IS 768B]
[2] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 769B]
And what great nation is there, that hath statutes and ordinances so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day? Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes saw, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life; but make them known unto thy children and thy children’s children; Deuteronomy 4:8 [New World Translation Revised: NWTr]
To the Israelites, Moses posed this question above. Indeed, no other nation enjoyed those benefits. Under the reign of King Solomon, who in his youth sought to carry out Jehovah’s laws, the people “lived in security” and enjoyed peace and prosperity, “Judah and Israel were as numerous as the grains of sand by the sea; they were eating and drinking and rejoicing. Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the River to the land of the Philis?tines and to the boundary of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life. Solomon’s food for each day was 30 cor measures of fine flour and 60 cor measures of flour, 10 fattened cattle, 20 pastured cattle, and 100 sheep, besides some stags, gazelles, roebucks, and fattened cuckoos. For he controlled everything this side of the River, from Tiph?sah to Gaz?a, including all the kings on this side of the River; and he enjoyed peace in every region, all around him. Judah and Israel lived in security, everyone under his own vine and under his own fig tree, from Dan to Beer-she?ba, all the days of Solomon” (1 Kings 4:20 – 25, [NWTr])
Regrettably, the Israelites eventually turned their backs on their God. Through the prophet Jeremiah, God declared: “The wise have been put to shame. They have become terrified and will be caught. Look! They have rejected the word of Jehovah, And what wisdom do they have?” (Jeremiah 8:9, [NWTr]) The result was that Jerusalem became “the bloodguilty city” full of “detestable things.” Finally it was brought to ruin and lay desolate for 70 years.—Ezekiel 22:2; Jeremiah 25:11.
[3] DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY: (PART 2 of PART1)
Let's see what Augustine had to say on it as reported in a Catholic source:
With respect the false doctrine of Apostolic Succession, Augustine had this to say per, <<<"In this same period of my priestthood< I also wrote a book against a letter of Donatus...In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said; 'Thou art Peter, and upo9n this rock I will build my Church," that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying; "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven." For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ," in confessing whom as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter." [source="The Fathers of the Church--Saint Augustine, The Retraction," (Washington, D.C.; 1968), translation by Mary I Bogan, Booi I, p. 90. ]>>>.
The Bible clearly states that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the head of the congregation, that he is alive, so why would he need a successor(s)?
Hebrews 7:22-25 clearly says in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible, "By so much is Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And the others indeed were made many priests, because by reason of death they were not suffered to continue: 24 But this, for that he continueth for ever, hath an everlasting priesthood: 25 Whereby he is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him; always living to make intercession for us. 26 For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens: 27 Who needeth not daily (as the other priests) to offer sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, in offering himself. 28 For the law maketh men priests, who have infirmity: but the word of the oath (which was since the law) the Son who is perfected for evermore."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB).
This is ratified at Romans 6:8-10, "Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ. 9 Knowing that Christ, rising again from the dead, dieth now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over him. 10 For in that he died to sin, he died once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. "(DRCB); and further testified to at Ephesians 5:23-24, "Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject to Christ: so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things."(DRCB). So the Bible shows that no successor is necessary as Jesus (Yeshua) is alive and needs no successor.
Now, i***roup really were as the RCC claims the successors to the apostles you would expect they would be adhering to the teachings and practices of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and his apostles. A Catholic Dictionary clearly states: "The Roman Church is Apostolic, because her doctrine is the faith once revealed to the Apostles, which faith she guards and explains, without adding to it or taking from it." [source = A Catholic Dictionary," by W.E. Addis and T. Arnold, page 176, published in London in 1957]. Now the question is one of fact, is this group really not adding to or taking from the faith as revealed by Jesus (Yeshua)and the Apostles, let's see:
Commentary on the Apostolic Succession which s a false tradition:
Now the Apostolic Succession false doctrine is that the 12 apostles have successors to whom authority has been passed by divine appointment. In the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the bishops as a group are said to be the successors of the apostles, and the bishop of Rome, the Pope, is claimed to be the successor of Peter. It is maintained that the Roman pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position and perform the functions of Peter, to whom Christ is said to have given primacy of authority over the whole church, but this is really not the case.
Let's take the first argument of the RCC that Peter was the 'rock' on which the church was built when in reality the 'rock' was Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Let's now consider whom the Apostles Peter and Paul understood to be the 'rock,' the 'cornerstone as shown at Acts 4:8-12, " Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said to them: Ye princes of the people and ancients, hear. 9 If we this day are examined concerning the good deed done to the infirm man, by what means he hath been made whole: 10 Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible). And this is further testified to at 1 Peter 2:4-8, " Unto whom coming, as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men but chosen and made honourable by God: 5 Be you also as living stones built up, a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 6 Wherefore it is said in the scripture: Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious. And he that shall believe in him shall not be confounded. 7 To you therefore that believe, he is honour: but to them that believe not, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner: 8 And a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal, to them who stumble at the word, neither do believe, whereunto also they are set."(DRCB); And further affirmed that Jesus (Yeshua) is the 'rock' at Ephesians 2:20, " Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:"(DRCB).
Last we look at Matthew 16:18 which the RCC tries to twist its meaning to be that Peter is the 'rock,' but as we have seen already, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the 'rock,' " And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."(DRCB) clearly affirming that he, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ was the 'rock' to Peter, so no apostolic succession here.
Let's see what Augustine had to say on it as reported in a Catholic source:
With respect the false doctrine of Apostolic Succession, Augustine had this to say per, "In this same period of my priestthood< I also wrote a book against a letter of Donatus...In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said; 'Thou art Peter, and upo9n this rock I will build my Church," that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying; "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven." For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ," in confessing whom as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter." [source="The Fathers of the Church--Saint Augustine, The Retraction," (Washington, D.C.; 1968), translation by Mary I Bogan, Booi I, p. 90. }
The Bible clearly states that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the head of the congregation, that he is alive, so why would he need a successor(s)?
Hebrews 7:22-25 clearly says in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible, "By so much is Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And the others indeed were made many priests, because by reason of death they were not suffered to continue: 24 But this, for that he continueth for ever, hath an everlasting priesthood: 25 Whereby he is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him; always living to make intercession for us. 26 For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens: 27 Who needeth not daily (as the other priests) to offer sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, in offering himself. 28 For the law maketh men priests, who have infirmity: but the word of the oath (which was since the law) the Son who is perfected for evermore."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB).
This is ratified at Romans 6:8-10, "Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ. 9 Knowing that Christ, rising again from the dead, dieth now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over him. 10 For in that he died to sin, he died once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. "(DRCB); and further testified to at Ephesians 5:23-24, "Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject to Christ: so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things."(DRCB). So the Bible shows that no successor is necessary as Jesus (Yeshua) is alive and needs no successor.
Have you ever wondered or considered whether the Apostle Peter was ever actually in Rome, and what the facts indicate? Rome is referred to in nine verses of the Word of God, and interestingly NOT one of these says that the Apostle Peter was there. In fact, 1 Peter 5:10-14 shows he was NOT in Rome, but in Babylon, " But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory in Christ Jesus, after you have suffered a little, will himself perfect you and confirm you and establish you. 11 To him be glory and empire, for ever and ever. Amen. 12 By Sylvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I think, I have written briefly: beseeching and testifying that this is the true grace of God, wherein you stand. 13 The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you. And so doth my son, Mark. 14 Salute one another with a holy kiss. Grace be to all you who are in Christ Jesus. Amen."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB). Now some claim this was a cryptic reference to Rome, but would this be consistent with his assignment to preach to the Jews as indicated at Galatians 2:9, " And when they had known the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship: that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision:"(DRCB), since there was a large Jewish population in Babylon. The "Encyclopaedia Judaica," Jerusalem, 1971, Volume 15, Column 755, when discussing production of the Babylonian Talmud, refers clearly to Judaism's 'great academies of Babylon' during the first part of the Common Era.
Now, i***roup really were as the RCC claims the successors to the apostles you would expect they would be adhering to the teachings and practices of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and his apostles. A Catholic Dictionary clearly states: "The Roman Church is Apostolic, because her doctrine is the faith once revealed to the Apostles, which faith she guards and explains, without adding to it or taking from it." [source = A Catholic Dictionary," by W.E. Addis and T. Arnold, page 176, published in London in 1957]. Now the question is one of fact, is this group really not adding to or taking from the faith as revealed by Jesus (Yeshua)and the Apostles, let's see:
The Identity of God (YHWH):
The Catholic Encyclopedia clearly says, "The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion." [source = "The Catholic Encyclopedia," 1912 edition, Volume XV, page 47]. However the New Encyclopedia Britannica clearly states, "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament....The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies." [source = " the New Encyclopedia Britannica," 1976, Micropaedia, Volume X, Page 126].
The New Catholic Encyclopedia clearly states, "There is the recognition on the part of exegetes and Biblical theologians, including a constantly growing number of Roman Catholics, that one should not speak of Trinitarinism in the New Testament without serious qualification. There is also the closely parallel recognition on the part of historians of dogma and systematic theologians that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4 th. Century." [source = "The New Catholic Encyclopedia," 1967, Volume XIV, page 295].
Also, the very concept of the Trinity, is shown to be just a myth in the New Testament (NT) at many places such as at many places, for example at John 17:3-5, " Now this is eternal life: That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 4 I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now glorify thou me, O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee." (Douay Rheims Catholic Bible: DRCB), etc. clearly showing Jesus (Yeshua) as a distinct individual separate and apart from his Father (YHWH) and subject to his Father (YHWH) and carrying out his Father's (YHWH's) will. Also, there are countless other scriptures clearly showing that the Trinity is nothing more than an impossible myth.
Celibacy of the Clergy of the Roman Church:
Pope Paul VI, in his encyclical, "Sacerdotalis Caelibatus," (Priestly Celibacy, 1967 in English), endorsed celibacy as a requirement for the clergy, but he admitted that 'the New Testament which preserves the teaching of Christ and the Apostles...does not openly demand celibacy of sacred ministers...Jesus Himself did not make it a prerequisite in His choice of the Twelve, nor did the Apostles for those who presided over the first Christian communities." [source = "The papal Encyclicals 1958-1981, published at Falls Church, Virginia, 1981, page 204]. The scriptures clearly show this NOT TO BE A RECOGNIZED PRACTICE AMONG THE APOSTLES in the 1 st. Century at 1 Corinthians 9:5, " Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas"; and at John 1:42, " And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone."(DRCB). And at Mark 1:29-31 where reference is made to the mother-in-law of Simon, " And forthwith, when they were come out of the synagogue, they entered into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John. 30 But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of a fever, and anon they tell him of her. 31 And he came and took her by the hand, and lifted her up; and immediately the fever left her, and she ministered unto them. "(DRCB).
And the specific instructions with respect to qualifications of those seeking responsible positions in the congregation at 1 Timothy 3:2, " It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, color](DRCB).
In fact, the requirement for Celibacy for priests, bishops, etc. is of pagan origin with the Buddist requiring it of their priest and monks before the Christian era per "History of Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church, by Henry C. Lea, London, 1932, fourth edition, page 6. Even earlier, the higher orders of the Babylonian priesthood were required to practice celibacy, according to "The Two Babylons," by Alexander Hislop of the Scottish church, New York, 1943, page 219.
Interestingly 1 Timothy 4:1-3 says, " Now the Spirit manifestly saith that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of devils, 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy and having their conscience seared, 3 Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful and by them that have known the truth."(DRCB).
The Bible Shows Separateness from the World not Attachment to It:
Pope Paul VI, when addressing the United Nations in 1965, said: "The peoples of the earth turn to the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace; We presume to present here, together with Our own, their tribute of honor and of hope." [source = "The Pope's Visit," New York, 1965, Time-Life Special Report, page 26.]
But John 15:18-19 clearly shows true Christians do NOT belong to the world, " If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (DRCB); and James 4:4 says, " Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world becometh an enemy of God."(DRCB) clearly showing if the Pope was truly the successor of the Apostles he would not be saying, " the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace," but would recognize Jesus (yeshua) Christ was the actual last hope as clearly shown in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible and in The New American Bible (Catholic).
Jesus (Yeshua) Clearly Showed That Christians Do Not Resort To Cardinal Weapons in Their Warfare:
Catholic historian E.I. Watkin writes: "Painful as the admission must be, we cannot in the interest of a false edification or dishonest loyalty deny or ignore the historical fact that Bishops have consistently supported all wars waged by the government of their country. I do not know in fact of a single instance in which a national hierarchy has condemned as unjust any war...Whatever the official theory, in practice 'my country always right' has been the maxim followed in wartime by Catholic Bishops." [source = "Morals and Missiles," London, 1959, edited by Charles S. Thompson, pages 57 and 58].
Now, let's consider what the Bible clearly says at Matthew 26:52, " Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword."(DRCB); and 1 John 3:10-12, " In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil. Whosoever is not just is not of God, or he that loveth not his brother. 11 ¶ For this is the declaration which you have heard from the beginning, that you should love one another. 12 Not as Cain, who was of the wicked one and killed his brother. And wherefore did he kill him? Because his own works were wicked: and his brother's just."(DRCB).
Therefore, in the light of the foregoing, it is readily apparent that those who claim to be the successors to the Apostles are NOT because they are neither practicing what Jesus (Yeshua) and his Apostles did, NOR are they teaching what Jesus (Yeshua) and his Apostles were.
Now, the Catholic church claims "the keys" were entrusted to the Apostle Peter, but what does the Bible show with respect to the "the keys" and what they were? Let's go look at the Bible evidence on this subject. First, the Biblical verse in question so all will know what is being referenced to, Matthew 16:18-20," And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ."(DRCB). The Catholic church claims that when Jesus (Yeshua) said, "thou art Peter," and he was the 'rock' on which the church was to be built, but as previously shown, the 'rock' was Christ himself, and the expression 'thou art' was a common method of expression, then, as shown at John 1:49 and many other places, " Nathanael answered him and said: Rabbi: Thou art the Son of God. Thou art the King of Israel"(DRCB).
Revelation 3:5-8 actually makes certain just who "the key" is when Jesus (Yeshua) is shown as referring to the symbolic key used to open up privileges and opportunities to humans as himself, Jesus (Yeshua), and he only used the Apostle Peter as his agent to open up the way for the Gentiles, " He that shall overcome shall thus be clothed in white garments: and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life. And I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels. 6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches. 7 And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia write: These things saith the Holy One and the true one, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and no man shutteth, shutteth and no man openeth: 8 I know thy works. Behold, I have given before thee a door opened, which no man can shut: because thou hast a little strength and hast kept my word and hast not denied my name."(DRCB). [Brief detail on the Law of Agencies which is basically as follows, "Jesus (Yeshua) was God's (YHWH's) appointed agent in accordance with the 'Biblical law of agency' described as, "Scripture mentions something being done by Person A, whilst another mentions it being done by Person B. This is best understood when we grasp the Schaliach Principle, or the Jewish Law of Agency, which is expressed in the dictum, "A person's agent is regarded as the person himself." Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principle." (The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, R.J.Z. Werblowski and Geoffrey Wigoder)].
Now, the Apostle peter was entrusted by Jesus (Yeshua) to open up to the Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles, the opportunity to receive God's (YHWH's) spirit with a view to their entering the heavenly Kingdom as shown by Acts 21:14-39, " But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you and with your ears receive my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day: 16 But this is that which was spoken of by the prophet Joel: 17 And it shall come to pass, in the last days, (saith the Lord), I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy: and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams. 18 And upon my servants indeed and upon my handmaids will I pour out in those days of my spirit: and they shall prophesy. 19 And I will shew wonders in the heaven above, and signs on the earth beneath: blood and fire, and vapour of smoke. 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness and the moon into blood, before the great and manifest day of the Lord to come. 21 And it shalt come to pass, that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him, in the midst of you, as you also know: 23 This same being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell, as it was impossible that he should be holden by it. 25 For David saith concerning him: I foresaw the Lord before my face: because he is at my right hand, that I may not be moved. 26 For this my heart hath been glad, and my tongue hath rejoiced: moreover my flesh also shall rest in hope. 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell: nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life: thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Ye men, brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David: that he died and was buried; and his sepulchre is with us to this present say. 30 Whereas therefore he was a prophet and knew that God hath sworn to him with an oath, that of the fruit of his loins one should sit upon his throne. 31 Foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of Christ. For neither was he left in hell: neither did his flesh see corruption.
32 This Jesus hath God raised again, whereof all we are witnesses. 33 Being exalted therefore by the right hand of God and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath poured forth this which you see and hear. 34 For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy enemies thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. 37 ¶ Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? 38 But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call."(DRCB); and Acts 8:14-17, " Now, when the apostles, who were in Jerusalem, had heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John. 15 Who, when they were come, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost. 16 For he was not as yet come upon any of them: but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands upon them: and they received the Holy Ghost."(DRCB).
And Acts 10:24-48 highlights this, " And the morrow after, he entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them, having called together his kinsmen and special friends. 25 And it came to pass that when Peter was come in, Cornelius came to meet him and falling at his feet adored. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying: Arise: I myself also am a man. 27 And talking with him, he went in and found many that were come together. 28 And he said to them: you know how abominable it is for a man that is a Jew to keep company or to come unto one of another nation: but God hath shewed to me, to call no man common or unclean. 29 For which cause, making no doubt, I came when I was sent for. I ask, therefore, for what cause you have sent for me? 30 And Cornelius said: Four days ago, unto this hour, I was praying in my house, at the ninth hour and behold a man stood before me in white apparel and said: 31 Cornelius, thy prayer is heard and thy alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. 32 Send therefore to Joppe: and call hither Simon, who is surnamed Peter. He lodgeth in the house of Simon a tanner, by the sea side. 33 Immediately therefore I sent to thee: and thou hast done well in coming. Now, therefore, all we are present in thy sight to hear all things whatsoever are commanded thee by the Lord. 34 And Peter opening his mouth, said: in very deed I perceive that God is not a respecter of persons. 35 But in every nation, he that feareth him and worketh justice is acceptable to him. 36 God sent the word to the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all). 37 You know the word which hath been published through all Judea: for it began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached. 38 Jesus of Nazareth: how God anointed him with the Holy Ghost and with power, who went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. 39 And we are witnesses of all things that he did in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem: whom they killed, hanging him upon a tree. 40 Him God raised up the third day and gave him to be made manifest, 41 Not to all the people, but to witnesses preordained by God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him, after he arose again from the dead.
42 And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that it is he who was appointed by God to be judge of the living and of the dead. 43 To him all the prophets give testimony, that by his name all receive remission of sins, who believe in him. 44 ¶ While Peter was yet speaking these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word. 45 And the faithful of the circumcision, who came with Peter, were astonished for that the grace of the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speaking with tongues and magnifying God. 47 Then Peter answered: Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Then they desired him to tarry with them some days."(DRCB).
Now did heaven wait on Peter to make decisions and then follow his lead? Not hardly as clearly shown by Acts 2:4, " And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost: and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak." And Acts 2:14, " But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you and with your ears receive my words."(DRCB). And Acts 10:19-20 follows up with, " And as Peter was thinking of the vision, the Spirit said to him: Behold three men seek thee. 20 Arise, therefore: get thee down and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them."(DRCB); and Matthew 18:18-19, " Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven."(DRCB).
Now, is Peter the judge as to who is worthy to enter the Kingdom as claimed? Well 2 Timothy 4:1-2, explains that the judge is NOT the Apostle Peter, but Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, himself, " I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming and his kingdom: 2 Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine."(DRCB). This Biblical fact that Jesus (Yeshua) is the judge and not the Apostle Peter is highlighted even further at 2 Timothy 4:8, " As to the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of justice which the Lord the just judge will render to me in that day: and not only to me, but to them also that love his coming. Make haste to come to me quickly."(DRCB)." [source - Discourse on the False Doctrine of Apostolic Succession Claimed by Some: (http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?board=succession&action=display&thread=1164996145 on 10/15/2007)]
Now their untruth is revealed in other ways such as the Apostle Peter wrote the book of 1 Peter about 62-64 AD in Babylon and the book of 2 Peter about 64 AD in Babylon so he was obviously alive in 64 AD. Now with regard to exactly when and how he died there is much dispute and little real evidence. But it can be stated that in 64 AD, the Apostle Peter was still alive.
Some of the conflicting information about the Apostle Peter is as follows:
<<<"As author James Hardy Ropes states:
The tradition, however, that Peter came to Rome, and suffered martyrdom under Nero (54-68 A.D.) either in the great persecution which followed the burning of the city or somewhat later, rests on a different and FIRMER basis....It is UNQUESTIONED that 150 years after Peter's death it was the COMMON BELIEF at Rome that he had died there, as had Paul. The "trophies" of the two great apostles could be seen on the Vatican Hill and by the Ostian Way...a firm local tradition of the death at Rome of both apostles is attested for a time NOT TOO DISTANT FROM THE EVENT. - [source - The Apostolic Age in the Light of Modern Criticism. New York. 1908. Pp. 215-216.]>>>.
<<<"However in Babylon Mystery Religion, by Ralph Woodrow:
There is no proof, Biblically speaking, that Peter ever went near Rome! The New Testament tells us he went to Antioch, Samaria, Joppa, Caesarea, and other places, BUT NOT ROME! This is a strange omission, especially since Rome was considered the most important city in the world![source - Babylon Mystery Religion by Ralph Woodrow]>>>.
<<<"Also in his book Ralph Woodrow said: Since the apostle Peter was known as Simon Peter, it is interesting to note that Rome not only had a "Peter," an interpreter of the mysteries, but also a religious leader named Simon who went there in the first century! This Simon, known to Bible Students as Simon the sorcerer (Acts 8:9), is said to have later gone to Rome and founded a counterfeit Christian religion there! -[source - Babylon Mystery Religion: Ancient and Modern, by Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, Inc. Riverside, CA. 1992. P. 73.]>>>.
<<<"After the death of Simon Magus his followers saw a golden opportunity to "Christianize" the pagan theology that Magus promulgated in Rome during his lifetime. By associating the "Peter" or Grand Interpreter (Opener) of Rome with Peter the apostle they were able to fool the members of God's Church and have them think that the pope was the representative and successor of Peter the apostle. "And so," writes Alexander Hislop in The Two Babylons, "to the blinded Christians of the apostasy, the Pope was the representative of Peter the apostle, while to the initiated pagans, he was only the representative of Peter, the interpreter of their well-known mysteries" (P. 210).[reference - The Two Babylons by Reverend Alexander Hislop]>>>.
<<<" Hasting's Dictionary of the Apostolic Church says: "The author or FIRST REPRESENTATIVE [POPE] of this baptized heathenism...is Simon Magus, who unquestionably ADULTERATED Christianity with PAGAN IDEAS AND PRACTICES, with the aid and with the sanction of Christianity (so called) to set up A RIVAL UNIVERSAL (OR CATHOLIC) RELIGION"[source - Hasting's Dictionary of the Apostolic Church (Vol. 2, pp. 514, 566).]>>>.
<<<"This amalgam of paganism and Christianity mentioned above, was a result of Simon Magus witnessing the preaching of Philip and Peter in Samaria. He soon saw the awesome potential of Christianity as a TOOL for his own advancement. When Peter returned to Rome (just prior to his death) he "found the minds of the people strangely bewitched and hardened AGAINST the embracing of the Christian religion by the subtleties and magic arts of Simon Magus...." (Cave). By the middle of the second century, when Justin Martyr wrote his Apology (152 A.D.) "the sect of the Simonians appears to have been FORMIDABLE, for he speaks four times of their founder, Simon...." [source - Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. 4, p. 682]>>>.
But, one thing we can be absolutely sure of as previously mentioned is that the Apostle Peter was still alive in 64 AD even if we can not be sure when or where he died and/or how.
Now the RCC falsely claims that Linus succeeded him, a false claim NOT born out in the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) - anywhere.
In fact even RCC documents kind of question this false claim as follows:
<<<" Pope Saint Linus (d. ca.79) was the second pope according to the Roman Catholic Church. According to Irenaeus[1], Jerome,[2] Eusebius,[3] John Chrysostom,[4] the Liberian Catalogue[5] and the Liber Pontificalis,[6] Linus was the second Bishop of Rome, succeeding Saint Peter and succeeded by Anacletus. Irenaeus identifies him with the Linus mentioned in 2 Timothy,[7] although this identification is not certain. The Liberian Catalogue and the Liber Pontificalis both date his Episcopate to AD 56-67 during the reign of Nero, but Jerome dates it to 67-78, and Eusebius dates the end of his Episcopate to the second year of the reign of Titus (80).
[b]Other sources disagree on Linus's place in the succession of Popes. Tertullian[8] says that Peter was succeeded by Clement I. The Apostolic Constitutions[9] says that Linus was the first Bishop of Rome, ordained by Paul, and was succeeded by Clement, who was ordained by Peter.
According to the Liber Pontificalis, Linus was an Italian from Tuscany, and his father's name was Herculanus. The Apostolic Constitutions names his mother as Claudia. The Liber Pontificalis also says that he issued a decree that women should cover their heads in church, and that he died a martyr and was buried on the Vatican Hill next to Peter. It gives the date of his death as 23 September, the date on which his feast is still celebrated.[10]" [source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
So it is readily apparent that this false claim is just slippery conjecture not backed by fact, and clearly disputed by the Bible NOT mentioning any successor to the Apostle Paul.
This cult also claims that one Anacletus I succeeded Linus, but of course this false claim is not backed by the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH).
In fact even RCC documents kind of question this false claim as follows:
<<<"According to Irenaeus[1], Jerome,[2] Eusebius,[3] John Chrysostom,[4] the Liberian Catalogue[5] and the Liber Pontificalis,[6] Linus was the second Bishop of Rome, succeeding Saint Peter and succeeded by Anacletus. Irenaeus identifies him with the Linus mentioned in 2 Timothy,[7] although this identification is not certain. The Liberian Catalogue and the Liber Pontificalis both date his Episcopate to AD 56-67 during the reign of Nero, but Jerome dates it to 67-78, and Eusebius dates the end of his Episcopate to the second year of the reign of Titus (80).
Other sources disagree on Linus's place in the succession of Popes. Tertullian[8] says that Peter was succeeded by Clement I. The Apostolic Constitutions[9] says that Linus was the first Bishop of Rome, ordained by Paul, and was succeeded by Clement, who was ordained by Peter." [source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
So as can readily be seen this false doctrine of Apostolic Succession is nothing but smoke and mirrors.
FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT MATTHIAS MADE BY SOME MEMBERS OF THE RCC CULT:
First, One member of this cult even falsely claimed that Matthias was a successor to the Apostle Peter even though the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) clearly says of Matthias:
Acts 1:23, "And they appointed two, Joseph, called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias." (DRCB)
Acts 1:26, "And they gave them lot, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." (DRCB).
And even RCC documents deny this as follows:
<<<" The Greek Matthias (or, in some manuscripts, Maththias), is a name derived from Mattathias, Hebrew Mattithiah, signifying "gift of Yahweh." Matthias was one of the seventy disciples of Jesus, and had been with Him from His baptism by John to the Ascension (Acts 1:21-22). It is related (Acts 1:15-26) that in the days following the Ascension, Peter proposed to the assembled brethren, who numbered one hundred and twenty, that they choose one to fill the place of the traitor Judas in the Apostolate. Two disciples, Joseph, called Barsabas, and Matthias were selected, and lots were drawn, with the result in favour of Matthias, who thus became associated with the eleven Apostles. Zeller has declared this narrative unhistoric, on the plea that the Apostles were in Galilee after the death of Jesus. As a matter of fact they did return to Galilee, but the Acts of the Apostles clearly state that about the feast of Pentecost they went back to Jerusalem.
All further information concerning the life and death of Matthias is vague and contradictory. According to Nicephorus (Hist. eccl., 2, 40), he first preached the Gospel in Judea, then in Ethiopia (that is to say, Colchis) and was crucified. The Synopsis of Dorotheus contains this tradition: Matthias in interiore Æthiopia, ubi Hyssus maris portus et Phasis fluvius est, hominibus barbaris et carnivoris praedicavit Evangelium. Mortuus est autem in Sebastopoli, ibique prope templum Solis sepultus (Matthias preached the Gospel to barbarians and cannibals in the interior of Ethiopia, at the harbour of the sea of Hyssus, at the mouth of the river Phasis. He died at Sebastopolis, and was buried there, near the Temple of the Sun). Still another tradition maintains that Matthias was stoned at Jerusalem by the Jews, and then beheaded (cf. Tillemont, "Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire eccl. des six premiers siècles", I, 406-7). It is said that St. Helena brought the relics of St. Matthias to Rome, and that a portion of them was at Trier. Bollandus (Acta SS., May, III) doubts if the relics that are in Rome are not rather those of the St. Matthias who was Bishop of Jerusalem about the year 120, and whose history would seem to have been confounded with that of the Apostle. The Latin Church celebrates the feast of St. Matthias on 24 February and the Greek Church on 9 August. [Note: After this article was written, the Latin Church moved the feast of St. Matthias to 14 May.]
Clement of Alexandria (Strom., III, 4) records a sentence that the Nicolaitans ascribe[source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
Second, some members of the RCC cult even claim that the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) is not the only authentic source, clearly showing, His obviously ignorant of the fact that the Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance putting the thoughts of God (YHWH) into the words of men much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most posters on threads on this forum can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.
To wit, the Bible is the ONLY book God (YHWH) ever inspired men to write as his scribes. In other words, God is its author and men only put his thoughts given to them by divine inspiration into their own words, the words of men. Not only that, all the other writers of later so called religious guidance books borrowed from it and made changes in accord with their strong man or so called prophet. Take the example of Joseph Smith who borrowed from it to write the Book of Mormon, but failed to give credit or source to the Bible and twisted some borrowed things into bizarre distortions. Other examples are of course the bizarre writings of David Koresh the Prophet of the Branch Dividians of Waco, Texas; and the Quran, etc.
Third, members of this cult readily forget what the Bible says at 2 Peter 1:19-21, "And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn and the day star arise in your hearts. 20 Understanding this first: That no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. 21 For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost." (DRCB); and 2 Timothy 3:16-17, "All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work." (DRCB).
CONCLUSION:
As Jesus (Yeshua) Christ said at John 5:31-39 that clearly shows how dumb the way of the RCC cult is,
"If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
32 There is another that beareth witness of me: and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.
33 You sent to John: and he gave testimony to the truth.
34 But I receive not testimony from man: but I say these things, that you may be saved.
35 He was a burning and a shining light: and you were willing for a time to rejoice in his light.
36 But I have a greater testimony than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to perfect, the works themselves which I do, give testimony of me, that the Father hath sent me.
37 And the Father himself who hath sent me hath given testimony of me: neither have you heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
38 And you have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him you believe not.
39 Search the scriptures: for you think in them to have life everlasting. And the same are they that give testimony of me." (DRCB).
Also, John 10:35 says, "If he called them gods to whom the word of God was spoken; and the scripture cannot be broken:" (DRCB) which clearly shows the scriptures, the Bible, is the authentic Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) for mankind to follow since it can not be broken.
Therefore, so much for the apostate (counterfeit) so called Christian groups that came into being by being part of the great falling away instead of remaining genuine (true) followers of Christ.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
prophecies happening, let alone 100 having been fulfilled, and had this to say:
