Why do peole think that Jesus was god?

It's hard to fathom how a King/Prince relationship is not understood by the masses. YHVH the King, and Yeshua the Prince. This is the theme of the bible. A prince is an heir to the throne, and becomes king. Thus Jesus is referred to as "Prince of Peace", but also receives the kingdom, and becomes King. What is so hard to understand about this?

All through the bible this theme is mimicked. "This is the meaning of the vision of the rock cut out of a mountain, but not by human hands.-a rock that broke the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and gold to pieces." Daniel 2:45
Sound like "a chip off the old block to you?" YHVH being king and mountain, and his son Yeshua the prince and the stone cut from the mountain. This is the same as Revelation 6:2 "There before me was a white horse! It's rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest."

The prince "Jesus" is given a crown by his father YHVH and receives the kingdom to complete his conquest.

All attempts to explain or prove Jesus and YHVH are one, are the ancient pagan traditions shielding a persons eyes from the truth.

The belief that God and Jesus are the same person, dishonors them both, and is a disgusting mockery!

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: Seede

John_3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Up to the time that Jesus said this, what He was saying was that the kingdom of heaven had not been established as yet and that no one of flesh had as yet been in heaven except Himself. That is my understanding but not as you have understood whatever you have read.

The "hath" part means this is an accomplished event, someone going up to heaven.
"Came down" should be "comes down", being in the Aorist tense.
"which is in heaven" should be someone who exists permanently in the spiritual realm denoted by the word, "heaven".

So, read in a gramatically correct way, you could come up with:

If the only person is the Son of Man who went up to heaven, then no one comes down from heaven except him, and he doesn't, but operates spiritually from above.

Which would mean that if a spirit being came down, they (the so-called spiritual leaders) would be completely overwhelmed.

The implication is that here talking to Nicodemus, was the form that he could listen to and hope to understand through metaphors what is going on in the spiritual realm that directs human events from above.

Once they (or now, us) could accept the person of Jesus, they could accept this mysterious person who Jesus is referring to by way of the vision of Daniel, that for all we know, could be who we think of as the third person of the godhead but is really a semi-human/semi-divine entity that is what transfers spiritual understanding to people after Jesus goes up to heaven to take his place in a rulership capacity.

Can you explain what you mean here further? Explain how and where you derive your conclusion of the part in bold above?

a reply to: OpinionatedB

Can you explain what you mean here further? Explain how and where you derive your conclusion of the part in bold above?

This speech appears to be describing the son of man from the vision of Daniel, who is an apocalyptic character who is an intermediary of spiritual powers between God and men (there are problems with the text of that part, with different versions of how that happens exactly), and had the ability to move between Heaven and earth by way of riding on clouds.

The normal explanation is that Jesus and the "son of man" are the same person, but in this paragraph, Jesus seems to be saying that the "son of man" really goes from Heaven (as in where God lives), to "the heavens" (as in the observable atmosphere directly above the earth, among the ordinary clouds), his being "the one who ascended".

Jesus started out in Heaven, and descended to the earth itself, so to me, it looks like the writer of the Gospel of John is creating a distinction, that these are actually two different persons but are connected in bringing about the Apocalypse.

a reply to: jmdewey60

Thank you, I am going to read that some more, and may have a few questions in the future on the topic. But for now, thank you for answering me clearly.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: [post=18164631]Rex282[/post

Text Being a Christain doesn't have anything to do with what I said. Many people believe "Christian doctrines"(like...a place called heaven..where you go to after you die) and are just as wrong.

After you wake up from whatever you were in then what?

I am very aware of your being facetious however I will answer you "agenda" questions anyways.
I never said I "know" specifically what happens to someone after they are resurrected.I used "wake up" as a metaphor for resurrection however I've written many times that mankinds life is in the physical realm which is a type of womb/matrix.It is where they are being conceived to be "born anew".This is not a concept I made up,Yahoshua alluded to this many times in the parables the parable of the seed being the cornerstone.

Yahoshua didn't explain it in detail because it can't be perceived what the details of the "process are however he used the metaphors of conception and growth all the time.The basis of a human conception is a shadow of what that process is.That is how reason works.We may not "know" how something works" however it will be reasonable(have tangible concrete reasons) even though it may appear to be "magic" to some. Mysticism is just a false "spiritual construct" fantasy to "believe in magic"

originally posted by: Seede
Do you have memory of this life?

.

To preface I take it you mean after the resurrection in the Kingdom of the creator God.You sound just like some religious people Yahoshua dealt with so if you answer me I will answer you.
Do you have any memories of your life in the womb of your mother?Did you choose to be conceived and born into the physical realm?(rhetorical)You want me to answer things that have not been experienced yet you don't know anything of what you have already experienced.

originally posted by: Seede Are you judged? If you are judged then what?

You have expressed many times in this forum that your construct of "judgement" is about punishment and that ultimate judgement is the eternal punishment of hell for MANY (except you).You believe punishment is punitive however the two words used to justify eternal punishment of hell are kolasis which means correction and timoria which means a rendering help.
Gods purpose is not to "destroy" us but to destroy that which WILL destroy us which is your false Belief System religion that is based in faith of fear.You have extrapolated the words of Yahoshua and made them into "your" doctrines of men and created an eternal punishment of hell meted out by the creator God the AUTHOR of ALL life.That is a complete contradiction of not only reason but any semblance of sanity and the worse false indictment against the creator God.There is no greater perversion. Fortunately you will be "punished" for it…corrected with a rendering help then you will be forgiven….which doesn't mean pardoned from guilt but freed from it's bondage...thank god

originally posted by: Seede
Tell us the rest of the story. ......

Before I do I am only going to say this once to you.One of the reasons why many "non Christians" do not take Christians as credible people in the least is because of their condescension like you have expressed to me in this post(and others).You believe you are being 'clever" and "sincere" and kind" to the deluded yet I know you are being anything but.It is evidence of what most Christians who act as you do agenda is.It is not "good News at all .This is about as personal as I will ever get with anyone making statements such as you do because that is the appropriate way to address the kind of derision.

originally posted by: Seede
You always leave us hanging about for the good part. We all know the bad part and now tell us the good part.

I can only guess to what you mean because you are being vague and condescending however if you mean what happens in The Kingdom of the creator God the answer is obvious to those with reason.You can't know.It is another realm of Life the REAL realm of life which this life is the shadow of DEATH.There is zero reason to "know" because it does not effect the receiving of it.Nothing anyone does "causes"that life to be lived.The only addendum is If the creator God wants you to know then you will know.

originally posted by: Seede
By the way where is Adolph in all of this?

By this last parting comment it is the final straw of evidence you have not ears to hear .The Hitler card that has been played twice in this thread is the kiss of death for credibility.if you had any you no longer do.You may believe you have been pardoned of all of your guilt but you haven't.You are accountable for EVERYTHING you say and do.You have sought the judgement of punitive punishment and this is evidence you have it.Your sowing of bad seeds will reap a bumper crop of weeds.

originally posted by: Rex282

originally posted by: Seede
By the way where is Adolph in all of this?

By this last parting comment it is the final straw of evidence you have not ears to hear .The Hitler card that has been played twice in this thread is the kiss of death for credibility.if you had any you no longer do.You may believe you have been pardoned of all of your guilt but you haven't.You are accountable for EVERYTHING you say and do.You have sought the judgement of punitive punishment and this is evidence you have it.Your sowing of bad seeds will reap a bumper crop of weeds.

But you still didn't answer his question - where IS Adolph in all of this?

I, for one, have been "pardoned" of nothing at all. That's not how it works. This ain't Canterbury, and Jesus ain't The Pardoner.I still carry the full weight of it.

Adolph still carries the full weight of his guilt, too.

Both of us will pay our debts to the last farthing. The difference is in the payment plan.

Now, Adolph may have got in on the same plan, or he may not have - that's not for me to determine. Nor is it for YOU to determine.

Your universalism, the notion that everyone without exception gets into the kingdom, makes a mockery of the entire premise. If everyone gets in, then there is no longer incentive to go along with the program. If we can live like hell, show no evidence that we've so much as glimpsed the narrow path, much less trod it, and still get to heaven, why bother?

As far as "credibility" goes, I'm not entirely sure who left you arbiter of mine - or Seede's. It looks to me like you might want to be looking to your own, and worrying less about ours.

You could start by actually answering "where is Adolph in all of this?" rather than trying to sidestep the question.

originally posted by: TheChrome

originally posted by: orangetom1999
a reply to: Seede

Where did Paul twist words to make Jesus into God? The bible says the Word became flesh. The bible does not say the Word was flesh. Big difference.

Don't short sheet this phrase. You are not telling it in it's entirety. It says the Word was made flesh...and more.

Here is the entirety.

John 1:14 Translations

King James Version (KJV)

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The Word is one of the names of God.

So too are Grace and Truth..

This is known by Believers knowledgeable in the Word ..Knowledgeable in the Spirit.

Thanks,
Orangetom

What does only begotten mean? Did God beget himself?

From page 15 of this thread.


Only Begotten and the Word are not the same thing..per se.

The Word is one of the names for God..as Is Peace..Light Wisdom..etc etc etc.

Only Begotten is referencing God creating a human in the womb of Mary ..without sin...For God cannot dwell in the presence of sin in his Godly form per se...hence he took on Human form..in the presence of a Son. The Word (God) took on Flesh..and we beheld his glory..the only begotten of the father. This is the only time a person was begotten in this manner...and to do the work he came to do. As a Son ..in the flesh ..he did the obedient duty of His Father.

Wow!! This is a fast moving thread...take a day off and it moves several pages.

Thanks,
Orangetom

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: orangetom1999

Whenever I see or read someone quoting .."the Oldest and best manuscripts " I automatically know that they are quoting classical greek..or from Wescott and Hort..English translation from Classical Greek.

Obviously you have internet access to be posting, so you could easily fix these ideas you have from learning mythology, by going to Wikipedia, starting by Googling "Textus Receptus".

I must make haste to shove off for now but will return at a later date to provide some historical informations about the "Textus Receptus" text as we have it to day in the King James Bible. What happened historically when the people came to know this version of the Bible verses the English Bibles they already had in what today is England.

And then compare this with other Bibles in the continent and what happened and did not happen. The effect it has had on us here in the Colonies.

My suggestion is to get away from the use of "proof texts" because what they are meant to "prove" are doctrines, which is usually things someone created, then want to support by using verses out of context.
My interpretation, which comes from reading the lexicon explanations of the Greek words in the text, is that we start our eternal lives now, where "eternal" means not just quantity of life, but also a quality.

Proof Texts are passages of the Word in which there is only one possible interpretation of what is said.

Reference Texts are passages of the Word in which there are many possible interpretations of what is said.

Most teachers and preachers prefer to go by reference texts..and not proof texts. Reference Texts can be made or interpreted..to read many things. Not so with a Proof Text. Reference Texts offer a lot of gray areas or wiggle room. Not so with Proof Texts. This also is seldom ever taught to those interested in the Word and what it says or does not say.
Many ministers are remiss in not teaching this to their flocks. It is a strong indicator of what is going on out here in Bible Study.

What modern translations try to do is change the wording or word order such that Proof Texts can be made to read something else than what was in earlier manuscripts. This is also done in many Reference Texts. Gail Riplinger explains this in her book ..."New Age Bible Versions" and shows in charts where on can see the various passages side by side in the different versions ..how they were changed from version to version to read something different.

She also gives a description of Brook Foss Wescott and Fenton John Anthony Hort and what they were up to..why they are unsuitable for translating the Bible or even doing any work on it...what their intent was in making their translation from the other than Textus Receptus Greek translations and Masoretic Hebrew Olde Testament Versions.

When you begin to understand it becomes quite obvious as to why she is put down by so many in the pubishing houses and among bible scholars...bible seminaries et al. They do not like her and what she has done ...and try often to discredit her work.

Those who know ..use proof texts to examine the Reference texts...not expert commentaries by learned scholars. They use the Word itself to interpret the Word by comparing known Proof Texts to what is often stated in Reference Texts.

When I have more time I will post on what happened historically by the hand of the Textus Receptus version..or AV 1611.

Thanks,
Orangetom

a reply to: orangetom1999

Most teachers and preachers prefer to go by reference texts..and not proof texts.

For what?
Like I said, employed in promoting doctrines that someone or other made up.
How about just teaching what the Bible says, instead of turning the Bible into a data base to mine "proofs" from?

When you begin to understand it becomes quite obvious as to why she is put down by so many in the pubishing houses and among bible scholars...bible seminaries et al.

Gail Riplinger seems a bit like a con artist to me.

originally posted by: nenothtu
You could start by actually answering "where is Adolph in all of this?" rather than trying to sidestep the question
I, for one, have been "pardoned" of nothing at all. That's not how it works. This ain't Canterbury, and Jesus ain't The Pardoner.I still carry the full weight of it.
Adolph still carries the full weight of his guilt, too.
Both of us will pay our debts to the last farthing. The difference is in the payment plan.

The Hitler card is when someone doesn't have a valid point or evidence they use Hitler as the strawman of evil.You have now played that card twice in the same thread.However you are correct on one "aspect" of my point... Hitler and you are both accountable for all of your "guilt" of what you have done and you WILL be held accountable and pay to the last farthing.However NONE of it is a pre-requsite for entering the Kingdom of the creator God If there is a creator God that "created" everything it serves no purpose at all to "torture" with punishment ANYONE for an eternity (or at all) in the place called hell.

There is no justice in any doctrine of hell.Yahoshua is the savor(deliverer) of ALL of mankind..no exceptions.If you need scripture to be a witness there is an abundance of it and I have posted it many times at ATS.Yahoshua's "name" (which succinctly means nature and character) ...is ….the salvation/deliverer of the creator God.It is IMPOSSIBLE for the creator God to not save/deliver ALL of creation even those that "YOU" deem not worthy.That is YOUR judgement not mine and YOU are accountable for it.

originally posted by: nenothtu
Now, Adolph may have got in on the same plan, or he may not have - that's not for me to determine. Nor is it for YOU to determine.

..and that's the point I am not determining(judging) ANYTHING of "punishment" or entering the Kingdom of the creator God…YOU and many others are.Under "your doctrine" you are just as guilty as Hitler.You cannot be pardoned… YOU must "pay" for all you have done.If you believe your "guilt" is sin and sin must be punished in the judgement of hell you have condemned yourself to the ETERNAL punishment of hell.There is no escape clause of faith or belief in religious doctrines whatever you have judged Hitler or anyone else with you have judged yourself.I am not the one judging or determining a standard YOU are.

originally posted by: nenothtu
Your universalism, the notion that everyone without exception gets into the kingdom, makes a mockery of the entire premise.

I am NOT a universalist.I am not mocking anything it is YOU that have mocked me and almost everything you have written is dripping with self righteous cynicism and "mockery" yet you can't see it because you think it's a clever way to say the Truth yet you have not said anything truthful.The only basis you have for you" doctrine" is your belief in something that is false and perverted.You have presented no evidence besides your belief in "your religion".I have presented the evidence of REASON and justice and mercy.All of it is supported by evidence in the scriptures that you not only mock but pervert to the doctrines of men but more significantly is supported by the nature and character of the creator God that you mock and pervert.

originally posted by: nenothtu
If everyone gets in, then there is no longer incentive to go along with the program. If we can live like hell, show no evidence that we've so much as glimpsed the narrow path, much less trod it, and still get to heaven, why bother?

Thank you for getting to the heart of the matter.You have stated you believe the only "incentive" to "do what is good" is to avoid punishment and if there is no punishment why bother.That is the state of mind of total depravation.If you are responsible for all of your guilt then the "program" you believe in means it is the punishment of eternal hell for YOU because you said in you own words..you WILL not be pardoned of any of "your guilt".Your Jesus will not be pardoning you from any of it no matter what the doctrines of your religion.If you believe your Jesus saves you from the etrnal punishment of hell because you "believe" he does there is no way for you to know if the"Hitlers" you condemn so cavalierly did not believe(and most likely did) the very same doctrine you do.

originally posted by: nenothtu
As far as "credibility" goes, I'm not entirely sure who left you arbiter of mine - or Seede's. It looks to me like you might want to be looking to your own, and worrying less about ours.

Yet it is you being an arbitrator that is are accusing me of things I have not done.It is YOU and seede that played the Hitler card then accuse me when I am speaking the truth.It is YOU and seede who have seem to be "worrying" about what I say.I said NOTHING to you until you said something to me the 2nd time.My last post was addressed to seede not you yet YOU made yourself the arbitrator.....

I stated in my OP that the creator God is the deliverer of ALL of mankind.The creator God alone is the "judge" yet you and many others claim YOU are then foist your false doctrines of men onto the creator God.You are the one "offended" by the reality that the creator God is just and merciful.It is YOU that have mocked the creator God with your perverted religious beliefs that are not true.You and many others believe with all your heart and soul "some"(most) of humanity will be tortured in the eternal punishment of hell for their guilt Yet YOU will not because you believe religious doctrines that "exempt you and believe that is "justice" where as all I have done is agree with the creator God yet you accuse me of mocking the creator God.

I have no idea what THE "judgment" of the creator God is for the guilt man has committed and neither does anyone else..including you.I am however POSITIVE that ALL of mankind WILL enter into the Kingdom of God realm simply because that is the creator God's nature and character…their "name" that Yahoshua "came in..The God of salvation..for ALL of mankind.Your opinion of the creator God means NOTHING.You believe he is an unmerciful monster that judges unjustly.Your only evidence is your faith in "your doctrines of religion".They are NOT the creator God's yet you have made yourself "judge" over man (Hitler at minimum).It is plain as day to many that do not believe in your false doctrines of God.It is because of beliefs like your's that men scoff and mock at the creator God.They want NOTHING to do with "that God" and rightly so….the God you "believe" in is not God at all…it is only "your God"…"YOU"…judge and jury…YOU have become the arbitrator of what is good and evil that condemns others and justify themselves.

Fortunately for YOU I am positive neither YOU nor seede nor anyone else will be sentenced to the eternal punishment of hell you so fervently believe in.It is only a perverted religious fantasy…thank god.

a reply to: Rex282

Yes..Indeed. I see and detect that quickly among leadership in this country .and in the phony media.

Whenever they need us to jump on the bandwagon and stop thinking for ourselves..they use Hitler as a sort of default setting to play through without us doing any of our own thinking and evaluating of what actually happened. Just an emotional reaction to the word "Hitler." NO individual thinking going on.

Hence when I see the word "Hitler " used or misused...my alarm bells go off quickly. I know automatically I am supposed so be silent an let others play through on the automatic default setting of the higher moral ground.

Hitler is a default setting...a censorship technique.

Our own phony leadership ...often uses Hitler to jerk the public around/default and get them to stop thinking for themselves.

So too the Media in shilling for the two phony political parties.

Thanks,
Orangetom

As I spoke in a previous post..the Textus Receptus Version of the Bible and the Masoretic Hebrew Olde Testament came into Northern Europe and finally into England because the Eastern Orthadox Church lost a war...and also Constantnople by some 1453 AD to the Muslim Invaders.
Those who were able to flee..took with them their religious documents into the Non Catholic areas.

When these documents finally made their way to England and were examined by the English Religious Authority it became quickly obvious that this different version did not say the same thing as did the Roman Catholic Based Versions which were at that time being used in England. Hence King James 1st commissioned a Bible to be written based on this new understanding.. verses what they knew from the Roman Catholic areas and texts.

Had King James known what would happen historically as a result of this publishing of the Bible which was to bear his name...he would not have done it.

As this version of the Bible became more widely known and accepted across England ..the English people came to know and understand more of the Bible than under the older versions. It is obvious by the correspondence which survives for our reading today.

What the English people began to learn ..which was not possible in Roman Catholic countries and under the Roman Catholic Versions of the Bible..is that their King was in heaven..and not on the throne of England. That a king was not divine right ..but only an administrator of Just English Law.

So when later King Charles 1st tried to pass his own tax..in violation of the Magna Carta..which stated that only Parliament could pass a tax...the stage was set for Civil War. The Kings people or cavaliers went to one side and the roundheads or Parliamentarians went the other way.
And by the time this Civil War ended under Oliver Cromwell.... King Charles 1st was put on the block and his head cut off.

This is the first time in the history of the western world where an ordinary king was removed and executed by the ordinary people. Now kings had been killed by other royalty ..in plots, overthrows, and other machinations by other royalty..but never by the ordinary people..and in a civil war.

For you see..King Charles 1st claimed "Divine Right of Kings." That his authority was from God. His crown was put on his head by the religious authority of the nation ..therefore his power was absolute. He could make or break any law he wanted..and no one could hold him accountable..for his power was absolute..from God.

But the English people. understood that he was only an administrator of Just English Laws...not divine right.

Since that time ..no king or queen of England has ever tried to declare themselves Divine Right. They have tried to increase their power and authority ..but not by divine right arguments. Cromwell and the Roundheads had settled that issue.

And the King James Version and Textus Receptus played a part in doing this. For this could not have happened in a Roman Catholic Nation where the kings were divine right.

So you see..when it came to the Colonies..and King George under taxation without representation...some here in the Colonies..understood that when the king had broken the law or tradition...did they have a right or even a precedent to turn on the king. Cromwell had settled that issue over one hundred years before.

For English practice was that taxes in the colonies were to be used for the purposes of the colonies..not brought back to England to fight another foreign war..as was also the case back with King Charles 1st...another foreign war.

Want to know why both Bible and history are such poorly taught subject in public schools today. This is why..you are never to be able to connect these dots to current events.

What did John Mccain mean when he stated of the President of the United states..several times...You are not a king?? This in the overuse of Executive orders to bypass Congress.

How about recently Sarah Palin in her statement "We don't do Kings."

www.breitbart.com...

Would the average American today even know what is meant here "?? Know enough history ..or even have ever heard of "Divine Right of Kings??" This verses Dancing with the Stars or American Idol...and the gods of sports and the big screen??

But I and a handful of others caught it.and know of this connection back to "Divine Right of Kings" , Oliver Cromwell..the English Civil War, the American Revolution and the Textus Receptus.

If you know..history is not a bunch of disconnected dots.



Separation of Church and state was intended as a limit on government ...never a limit on the people.

What government has done is written a new translation..a new rule..called the Exclusionary Rule which allows them to turn Separation of Church and State on it's head and put limits on the people while government quietly turns back towards more power..absolute power and "Divine Right of Kings."

Separation of Church and State..was always intended as a limit on Government to prevent Goverenment from returning back to absolute power..or returning to a version of Divine Right of Kings.
This is what Sarah Palin and John Mccain are referencing when they speak out against a king.

But you have to know some history and the Bible to understand this. It also helps to know how the various bibles came about and what happened as a result of these Bible Versions.

Many of you want to argue and debate what versions of the bible are what ..without much historical context to see and know what happened with them in history. What is happening today..right now....right in front of you.

I am here to tell you ..that this history would not have happened in the Roman Catholic Areas and under the Non Textus Receptus versions of the Bible. And it changed the history of the Western World.

But you will never learn this from Public Schools in this manner..nor from our leadership always wanting to increase their power. To do this ..our leadership must remover the power of the Bible from our understandings..from our hearts and replace it with watered down versions of todays Bibles. To never allow us the possibility of this knowledge.

And I can tell you that the World system ..under the god of this world intends that this knowledge never be learned or understood by ordinary people. For this is the god to which our Congress and president have privily switched...without the knowledge of most of the people...and even without the knowledge of many in leadership positions.

Hope this helps some of you with your thinking in the future...even when watching or listening to the news and information's out there.

Bewarned,

Orangetom

jmdewey60

Most teachers and preachers prefer to go by reference texts..and not proof texts.

For what?
Like I said, employed in promoting doctrines that someone or other made up.

For wiggle room..to make the Bible say what it does not say. To do as did the Pharisees and Hebrew Leadership did in Ancient Israel. To go after other gods...and without most knowing this has been done to them. A counterfeit works best in this manner.

How about just teaching what the Bible says, instead of turning the Bible into a data base to mine "proofs" from?

When you begin to understand it becomes quite obvious as to why she is put down by so many in the pubishing houses and among bible scholars...bible seminaries et al.

Gail Riplinger seems a bit like a con artist to me.

I check up on Gail Riplinger just as I check up on any Bible scholar or minister. The best tool for interpreting the Bible is the Bible.

Thanks,
Orangetom

a reply to: orangetom1999

For wiggle room..to make the Bible say what it does not say. To do as did the Pharisees and Hebrew Leadership did in Ancient Israel. To go after other gods...and without most knowing this has been done to them. A counterfeit works best in this manner.

I'm not talking about some hypothetical "other" people, I'm talking about what you, or the group you are associated with, are doing with either "proof" texts, or "reference" texts.

I'm suggesting that you are promoting doctrines rather than actual biblical teachings, otherwise you wouldn't need to culling the Bible for these texts.

I check up on Gail Riplinger just as I check up on any Bible scholar or minister. The best tool for interpreting the Bible is the Bible.

Did you go through all the texts that she cites as having been changed or shortened, or left out, with the actual current translations, to see for yourself that they do in fact do all those things that she claims?

a reply to: jmdewey60

Wow!!

Interesting statement here of yours..

I'm suggesting that you are promoting doctrines rather than actual biblical teachings, otherwise you wouldn't need to culling the Bible for these texts.

I don't think so..and much of this can be seen in anti God positions returning today...in the form of counterfeits or attempting to pass as positions of pseudo higher learning or pseudo higher morality..when it is no such thing. Not just pass..in Ancient times..Biblical Olde Testament times..but New Testament times unto today..right now at our doorsteps.

What does it mean religiously, politically, morally..when a government states publically...that they can make people do things which go against their religious belief as did this administration and current president. Remember what I just posted about " divine right of kings" and "absolute power."


One of the things about which the bible is written for our knowledge is not only what God wants us to do ..but what God wants us to avoid...particularly in the form of Counterfeits...Occult Counterfeits...to get us on the other religions.

If you know how to see and read this..it is in the Olde and New Testaments alike. But it is seldom taught by most ministers. And the reason would surprise many Believers.


One of the things that both Christians and the Hebrews were not to do is to do as the nations surrounding them were doing. One of the fingerprints of the nations surrounding Ancient Israel..is festivals and holiday with rampant runaway sexuality practiced openly...and throughout the people.

This is seldom known today in our censored sanitized educations..even by our ministers..they too do not teach it.

God's people in Olde Testament times as well as New Testament times were to show who they are and the name of their God by their conduct...and what they would not do..as well as follow God's instructions.

Today we are want to return to this pattern of rampant runaway sexuality....as was in Ancient Times..where people openly defined who and what they were and their religion by rampant runaway sexuality.

How many would know that rampant runaway open sexuality is the fingerprint of The Fallen???

And when we have government and leadership openly following this position and dogma...this other religion...we now know the name of their god...the god of the Fallen.

Tell me I am imagining this..making it up???

I can do this in other ways too...not just on this topic..but on money as well..to show that they are following in government ..the counterfeiter...as it states on the money .."In God We Trust."

Am I making this up..jmdewey60??


Separation of Church and State cannot be possible when Churches are price supported by government tax subsidies. People being able to take giving to the churches off on their taxes. Churches should never have a tax number...they should be tax immune...not tax exempt.

A tax number is a corporation number...and a corporation is a creature of the state. No separation possible here. Teach and preach something the state does not want and a church risks being audited. They are not free to preach and teach the whole council of God.

A church should never have a tax number...ever. This is a lie and a counterfeit on the part of government and on the part of the churches...they don't dare teach this to their flocks.


jmdewey60..you want to hang around here and post stuff about the Bible and its history....texts..no problem. I am also capable of showing how it reflects and affects today among the ignorance deliberately fostered by our lack of education in many things..including Bible.

These are not isolated events..but dots capable of being connected..right down to our every day lives. Or as Solomon stated..."Nothing new under the sun."

Hope this helps some of the readers out here as well as yourself.

Thanks,
Orangetom



Post Script...

Before I forget ..

The question posed here by the OP back on page 1 is a moot point and not important per se. It is only one facet of the Word. But it does cause believers to argue amongst themselves..and divide...not unite under the doctrine and instruction of His Word.

a reply to: orangetom1999

A church should never have a tax number...ever. This is a lie and a counterfeit on the part of government and on the part of the churches...they don't dare teach this to their flocks.

They wouldn't teach that if they had one of these numbers.

I don't see how this validates your author of the 'occult Bibles' book.

. . . unite under the doctrine and instruction of His Word.

Who decides this doctrine?
If you are taking apart the Bible to support man-made doctrine, then it becomes something other than "the word" in my opinion.

jmdewey60,

They wouldn't teach that if they had one of these numbers.

Exactly correct jmdewey60...exactly correct.
In this system it is obvious that informations and thought processes are being controlled unless you know how to cut the control strings. Don't count on your ministers nor the government to make this clear to you...or us.

I don't see how this validates your author of the 'occult Bibles' book.

No problem here. If you are His..it will be revealed to you in process of time. It is pretty obvious to me..to others as well.
Oh..this is not a validation of the author of the occult Bibles Book..and if you read Gail Riplinger carefully ...she takes that position. What it does is validate the KJV and God's Word. Not Gail Riplinger. I am a bit surprised that you would come up with this line of thought. For the Believer is to give all glory and credit to God..not to us. That you do not seem to be aware of this is very telling jmdewey60 and particularly for one so well versed in His Word. I am given to ask where your heart and soul are located. But then again ..I understood this from the very beginning of reading your posts. No problem ..I merely point this out. You might want to give this some thought.

Who decides this doctrine?
If you are taking apart the Bible to support man-made doctrine, then it becomes something other than "the word" in my opinion.

Wow!! Once again. God decides. For it was God who told the Prophet..that he has reserved unto Himself 7,000 who have not bowed the knew to baal.
For He has also preserved His Word ..even in the Olde Testament there are examples of His Word being discovered after being hidden and concealed from the people for so long. He can do this again today...and is doing it ..praise be unto Him.

The Hebrews were disobedient in so much in Ancient Israel..the are so today ...right now...disobedient. But so too are many of His Believers ..and without many even knowing it. So deep has the traditions of men been ingrained into them by rote..without thinking about it.
This is the Occult tradition..the tradition of men of which I speak.

But they did preserve the Word...into what is today known as the Masoretic Text...
The other thing that happened is that one blood line was preserved for us unto today...untainted..unsoiled.

And this blood war continues unto today right now..in the "Ever War."

Thanks for your post,
Orangetom

originally posted by: orangetom1999

originally posted by: TheChrome

originally posted by: orangetom1999
a reply to: Seede

Where did Paul twist words to make Jesus into God? The bible says the Word became flesh. The bible does not say the Word was flesh. Big difference.

Don't short sheet this phrase. You are not telling it in it's entirety. It says the Word was made flesh...and more.

Here is the entirety.

John 1:14 Translations

King James Version (KJV)

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The Word is one of the names of God.

So too are Grace and Truth..

This is known by Believers knowledgeable in the Word ..Knowledgeable in the Spirit.

Thanks,
Orangetom

What does only begotten mean? Did God beget himself?

From page 15 of this thread.


Only Begotten and the Word are not the same thing..per se.

The Word is one of the names for God..as Is Peace..Light Wisdom..etc etc etc.

Only Begotten is referencing God creating a human in the womb of Mary ..without sin...For God cannot dwell in the presence of sin in his Godly form per se...hence he took on Human form..in the presence of a Son. The Word (God) took on Flesh..and we beheld his glory..the only begotten of the father. This is the only time a person was begotten in this manner...and to do the work he came to do. As a Son ..in the flesh ..he did the obedient duty of His Father.

Wow!! This is a fast moving thread...take a day off and it moves several pages.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Now that makes no sense in accordance with the rest of the bible. Here at Proverbs we have Jesus having a birth (pre-human) and instead of being referred to as the "word" he is "wisdom"

"I, wisdom, dwell together with prudence; I possess knowledge and discretion." (Proverbs 8:12)

Here is where the relationship is illustrated:

"The Lord (YHVH) brought me forth as the first of his works, (Jesus was created by God) before his deeds of old. I was appointed from eternity , from the beginning, before the world began." (Proverbs 8:22,23)

"Then I was the craftsman at his side (the Word who through which all was created), I was filled with delight day after day, rejoicing always in his presence, rejoicing in his whole world and delighting in mankind." (Proverbs 8:30-31)

"For whoever finds me (Jesus, wisdom personified) finds life and receives favor from the Lord (YHVH)." (Proverbs 8:35)

a reply to: orangetom1999

I am a bit surprised that you would come up with this line of thought.

Go through your posts and look at how many times her name comes up and how defensive you are of her.

You might want to give this some thought.

I have lots of posts on earlier threads on this forum where former members were promoting King James only.
I also have had a lot of this type of thinking given to me by a cousin who is really into it, who was using the same sort of stuff that you are talking about.
Before that I have studied a lot of history, including reading biographies of Erasmus.
I've gone through history books on the King James translation, and on the development of the Bible.
The point being, I think about not just the Bible in what it says, but I think a lot about the Bible itself, as if my mind is working on it 24 hours a day.

The good news is that the serious biblical scholars who specialize in the field of the best Greek text, have been progressing beyond the idea that the oldest existing manuscripts are necessarily the best.
Extreme age is most likely an indication of a manuscript's lack of being used, its inferiority known at the time of its being made.

But they did preserve the Word...into what is today known as the Masoretic Text...

The Masoretic is not as old as the New Testament, and is a product of the time of the Talmud.
That's why I don't trust it, and instead study the Greek text of the Septuagint.

The other thing that happened is that one blood line was preserved for us unto today...untainted..unsoiled.

If you mean the Jews, most of the people we think of today as "Jews" are Ashkenazi, who are actually descended from the Khazars, who were Caucasian pagans who converted to Judaism for business reasons around 700 AD.

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:"

Col. 1:15 - Jesus is the image of the invisible God, the "firstborn" of all creation. The Greek word for "first-born" is "prototokos" which means eternal preexistence (it never means created).


I wasn't aware of another Scripture verse that shows Jesus is God until I read the above verse. Thanks John Salza (Catholic Apologist). If you look at John's list all the other many verses showing Jesus is God. He gives the numbered verse and explains it.

This is the main reason they wanted to kill Our Lord, other reasons too but the Jewish group who came to arrest Our Lord understood Jesus proclaimed, He is God.

scripturecatholic.com...