Why do peole think that Jesus was god?

a reply to: colbe

The Greek word for "first-born" is "prototokos" which means eternal preexistence (it never means created).

It means, to come into existence, when used literally.
Most of the time in the Bible (including the Septuagint) it just means "firstborn".
This passage that the verse in question is in, is talking about the kingdom of God that was spreading through the world by way of the gospel.
The "creation" is the people changing as they come into the kingdom.

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: colbe

The Greek word for "first-born" is "prototokos" which means eternal preexistence (it never means created).

It means, to come into existence, when used literally.
Most of the time in the Bible (including the Septuagint) it just means "firstborn".
This passage that the verse in question is in, is talking about the kingdom of God that was spreading through the world by way of the gospel.
The "creation" is the people changing as they come into the kingdom.

No it doesn't, "prototokos" means eternal preexistance.

Do a search people, non-Catholic and Catholics give proof, repeatedly, there are 10 pages to confirm.

www.google.com...:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a &channel=sb#channel=sb&q=prototokos%22+which+means+eternal+preexistence&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&start=10

a reply to: colbe

No it doesn't, "prototokos" means eternal preexistance.

It doesn't.
It is a word in a verse that gets cited in the debate of whether Jesus is eternal or not.
That isn't proof that it means anything beyond its literal meaning of "firstborn".
This is what lexicons are for, to give word meanings for the Greek words in the original text.

John Salza, your "Catholic Apologist", is not an authority on theology or the Bible, but is an attorney.
Salza is the author of Masonry Unmasked, so is about on the same level as orangetom1999 's Gail Riplinger, author of Occult Bibles, with her degree in home economics.

originally posted by: jmdewey60
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.

I agree with what Gail Riplinger is stating about the new Bible Versions. But I knew this before I ever heard of Gail Riplinger. There were numerous preachers and teachers trying to get this point across. What Gail did is publish a book in which there were charts where you could see several versions and know from what texts they originated and see them side by side...to compare them to the KJV In different passages to see how the changes came about and how they read.
I can make the same point about you and the septuigant...and other versions. Anything but the KJV.


.

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.
It is a matter of the oldest texts and what they say..the writing itself...not the manuscripts..who's documents have the most wormholes.

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.

I don't use the Talmud...as the Talmud is also a document often used by the Occult Religions. Rules for getting around the Rules...you can break the Rules but you must follow these Talmudic Rules to break the Rules.

It is obvious that Jesus in His walk on this earth...in the flesh..did not follow the Talmud..but the will of His Father.

The Talmud is the tradition of men for which the Hebrews got caught up into ..and for which they lost the land by 70AD.
This oral tradition of the Talmud was around for a long time before the Hebrews began to write it down. They ran into it big time in the Captivity in Babylon...though they were trying to introduce it or overlay it on the Law of Moses when it was no such thing.

Occult groups trying to infiltrate concealed doctrine and tradition use the Talmud and Talmudic Techniques. The Supreme Courts Exclusionary Rule is a Talmudic Rule. A separate Rule which allows government to limit our religious freedoms..and gives government control. The First Amendment was intended as a limit on government not on the People.
As a matter of fact..the first ten amendments were intended as a limit on government. Many times the government has gone to the courts to get Talmidic inerpretations to get around these 10 amendments and expand their power...to do what the amendments say they cannot do.

For I do not travel to the East..up seven steps..but I am aware of the Talmudic practices of those who do. Their traditions going way back in history. Their Occult Traditions and customs.

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.

No..I mean Jesus the Christ for Remission of Sins. His untainted bloodline.

I am also aware of this history of the Khazars and their conversion to Judiasm. I am also aware of the Shephardic Jews...such as the Ethiopians who were imported some time in the late 1970s or early 1980s into Israel..that they practiced the Olde Testament as it was done in the time before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. I know that these people do not know Judiasm...as it was changed to accommodate the synagogue and under the Pharisees. These Ethiopians did not know many of the post 70ad adaptations of which we know today..the holidays etc.

They are more true Jews than what we know today.

Oh....It should not be Judiasm..but Mosesism...after the Law...not Judiasm. But they cannot do that ..with the destruction of the Temple after 70 ad.

I find the account of what happened in or about 70 ad by Flavius Josephus to be a very fascinating account in history. I was shocked to find out what the Jews were doing amongst themselves before the Romans encircled them.

I do not use the Septuagint...Sinaticus..Aleph....or Codex B versions...because of the "Traditions of Men."

I am not into Judiac Phariseeism nor Hellenic Phariseeism. I am aware of what these people were doing to the Word for political purposes.

I can also tell you that as a record of history....that it was some 200 years after the breakaway from the bondage of Rome by Martin Luther...that historians began to notice a difference in the standard of living in these nations and the heavily Roman Catholic areas. It was these areas...Northern Germany ..the Lowland Nations...and England...ultimately Englands step child...America which were to go on to prosper amongst the ordinary people. Prosper in ways not known in the traditionally and heavily Catholic Areas. For these man made traditions are Bondage. And someone is trying today to use and misuse the religion to return us back to bondage..back to pre flood customs.

a reply to: orangetom1999

I do not use the Septuagint...Sinaticus..Aleph....or Codex B versions...because of the "Traditions of Men.

The Septuagint was the "tradition" of Jesus and the Apostles.

. . . Jesus the Christ for Remission of Sins. His untainted bloodline.

Are you implying that Jesus' blood has the ability for forgiveness due to his ancestry?
The power of Jesus' death is based on the righteousness of the life that he lived.
Forgiveness is something we seek as individuals through repentance.
Jesus' death and resurrection is what serves as proof that our repentance will be effective in our acceptance by God.
That is because Jesus was a human like us, in a physical human body that is tainted by so many generations of sin, in a world tainted by thousands of years of sin.
Despite all of those things that could arguably in themselves disqualify a person as being acceptable by God, he did not give into the temptations of the world and human weakness, to become disobedient himself.
Jesus was vindicated, even after being executed as a criminal, by being raised from the dead by God, and accepted into heaven.

originally posted by: colbe
"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...

Agree here with Colbe..

As to why the Hebrews wanted to kill Him...particularly the Hebrew Pharisees is that he was showing them up ..over and over again for the scam artists that the Hebrew Leadership had become...that they were of the counterfeiter ...the Fallen..and had substituted the traditions of men for the Word of God. They ..the Hebrew leadership had in fact..switched gods and told no one they had done this. The had also lead or mislead the rest of the Hebrews down this path..to the counterfeiter.

Exactly what many of our ministers are doing with all the various translations of the Word..today. And very few..even among the learned can see it today ...they are in fact..in on it.

Orangetom

jmdewey60

I do not use the Septuagint...Sinaticus..Aleph....or Codex B versions...because of the "Traditions of Men.

The Septuagint was the "tradition" of Jesus and the Apostles.

Not possible..simply because of the history ..which happened in some nations ..but did not happen in other nations. History alone speaks against this. The Septuagint and other such versions are of Bondage ...with her children...for they did not historically produce any fruit other than confusion.

. . . Jesus the Christ for Remission of Sins. His untainted bloodline.

Are you implying that Jesus' blood has the ability for forgiveness due to his ancestry?

No..I am saying that his blood is pure...and was kept that way despite all the traditions of men trying to infect the Hebrew People with these counterfeits. His blood saves. For we are saved by Blood...not by works. When we stand before God He needs to see His blood on us..not our works and deeds. This saving, redeeming blood..Not man's counterfeit traditions of works.

For the pattern throughout the Word is that God in his normal state cannot exist or be in the presence of sin. This is why when He took on Human form to be here on earth he was born without sin to separate Him from the Traditions of Men.

The tradition of men is to provide mans own offerings..man's own traditions man's own sacrifices...mans own counterfeits and hope no one notices the switch..three card monte..the shell game.

The power of Jesus' death is based on the righteousness of the life that he lived.
Forgiveness is something we seek as individuals through repentance.
Jesus' death and resurrection is what serves as proof that our repentance will be effective in our acceptance by God.
That is because Jesus was a human like us, in a physical human body that is tainted by so many generations of sin, in a world tainted by thousands of years of sin.
Despite all of those things that could arguably in themselves disqualify a person as being acceptable by God, he did not give into the temptations of the world and human weakness, to become disobedient himself.
Jesus was vindicated, even after being executed as a criminal, by being raised from the dead by God, and accepted into heaven.

You have one thing correct here...we are accepted...by God. Most churches have that we must accept. We are made acceptable..but God does the accepting.

The "Ever War" is a blood war which went on from Adam unto today..and continues..to attempt to purge His covering and redeeming Blood from our souls. Failing that...the long term intention of the Fallen and the leader of the Fallen will be to remove all believers from this earth and have the earth dedicated to the Fallen.

This blood war is for the purpose of removing His blood from the earth and replacing it with the blood line of the Fallen.

For God took great pains to have one blood line preserved..and we see in His Word..the trail of that bloodline...in the Book of Matthew and the Book of Luke..back to Adam.

In Issac shall thy seed be called...not in Ishmael.

for the pattern/tradition today is to make us Ishmaelites..not of Issac and his seed...(Singular)

The Hebrews stated..we are the seeds of Abraham....but Paul testified...it does not say that ..it says ..seed...singular.

This is a bloodline...in a Blood War which is still going on.

For we are saved by Blood..and God needs to see that Blood on us when we stand before him..that we are covered by that Blood..not the blood of goats, and bullocks. But God decides who is covered in that Blood..by His Will..by His acceptance of us...after making us acceptable.

Even Noah...who was perfect in his generations...meaning he was untainted by the sin going on in thoses days...Noah, his sons and their wives. Even back then the fallen were trying to taint the bloodlines by sin...and are still trying to so do...today.

Thanks,
Orangetom

a reply to: orangetom1999

...particularly the Hebrew Pharisees is that he was showing them up ..over and over again for the scam artists that the Hebrew Leadership had become...that they were of the counterfeiter ...the Fallen..and had substituted the traditions of men for the Word of God. They ..the Hebrew leadership had in fact..switched gods and told no one they had done this. The had also lead or mislead the rest of the Hebrews down this path..to the counterfeiter.

What you are describing would better fit the leadership of the rabbis after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple by the Romans in 70 AD.
They turned to their own writings, the Talmud, as the authority over the Old Testament.
They "switched gods" to themselves being 'the council of god'.

The problem with the Jews of Jesus' time was worshiping the scripture without the spiritual benefit that they could have gotten from its knowledge. Making the book their god.
A lot of the Pharisees were persuaded by Jesus and were won over to him, recognizing his grasp on true righteousness.
Who ended up being Jesus' real enemies were the temple leadership as they used that as a source of power that they were unwilling to relinquish.

a reply to: orangetom1999

Not possible..simply because of the history ..which happened in some nations ..but did not happen in other nations. History alone speaks against this. The Septuagint and other such versions are of Bondage ...with her children...for they did not historically produce any fruit other than confusion.

So, Christianity was not "fruit"?

No..I am saying that his blood is pure...and was kept that way despite all the traditions of men trying to infect the Hebrew People with these counterfeits. His blood saves. For we are saved by Blood...not by works. When we stand before God He needs to see His blood on us..not our works and deeds. This saving, redeeming blood..Not man's counterfeit traditions of works.

You are reciting a lot of theory, and not biblical teaching.
There may be a word here and there from the Bible, but they are arranged to say something other than what they said when intact in the text.
The purpose of faith is to act as a spiritual law of the heart to free us from committing sins, to be pure and righteous in our actions and lifestyle.

For the pattern throughout the Word is that God in his normal state cannot exist or be in the presence of sin. This is why when He took on Human form to be here on earth he was born without sin to separate Him from the Traditions of Men.

The "pattern" is to have a righteous person to serve as representative and intercessor for the people before God.
Jesus was born of a woman, in the flesh that we are also born to, weakened as it is by sin over the former age.
"Traditions" were about Jesus, and those were utilized by him to fulfill his duties on earth as a righteous ruler.
The leadership was caught up in keeping the exclusivity of the kingdom that they thought they controlled.

The tradition of men is to provide mans own offerings..man's own traditions man's own sacrifices...mans own counterfeits and hope no one notices the switch..three card monte..the shell game.

Sorry to burst your bubble but we are to present ourselves as a living sacrifice.
That means that we live unblemished lives to be presentable to God as an offering.

You have one thing correct here...we are accepted...by God. Most churches have that we must accept. We are made acceptable..but God does the accepting.

Notice how I make it a conditional statement.

The "Ever War" is a blood war which went on from Adam unto today..and continues..to attempt to purge His covering and redeeming Blood from our souls. Failing that...the long term intention of the Fallen and the leader of the Fallen will be to remove all believers from this earth and have the earth dedicated to the Fallen.

This is news to me. This must be a limited sized group who believe in what you are saying.
I have no idea how someone can purge someone else of a "covering of blood", especially if it is only just a metaphorical allusion to illustrate a literal thing that is just a historical fact.
If you mean getting rid of the teaching in church that there is a literal value to Jesus' blood that is a medium of exchange to pay for "sin guilt", then that is something else.

This blood war is for the purpose of removing His blood from the earth and replacing it with the blood line of the Fallen.

Do you mean a literal race of people who are descended from a non-human species?
This is obviously wrong since the gospel is for everyone and we are to all be brothers without making racial distinctions.

For God took great pains to have one blood line preserved..and we see in His Word..the trail of that bloodline...in the Book of Matthew and the Book of Luke..back to Adam.

That is to establish that there is a such thing as a lord who is a human, that goes back to the original plan of how the world was supposed to work, if there was not the fall.
It isn't about there being competing races to take over the world.

The Hebrews stated..we are the seeds of Abraham....but Paul testified...it does not say that ..it says ..seed...singular.

Meaning, Jesus.
Paul would be the last person to sanction discrimination.

For we are saved by Blood..and God needs to see that Blood on us when we stand before him..that we are covered by that Blood..not the blood of goats, and bullocks. But God decides who is covered in that Blood..by His Will..by His acceptance of us...after making us acceptable.

"The blood" was a metaphorical device to make an analogy of a priesthood function that Jesus serves in heaven as our advocate and representative to allow the continued existence of the earth as all come to repentance.

Even Noah...who was perfect in his generations...meaning he was untainted by the sin going on in thoses days...Noah, his sons and their wives. Even back then the fallen were trying to taint the bloodlines by sin...and are still trying to so do...today.

If you read the Greek version, then it is easier to figure out what it means, Moses was the most righteous person of his generation.
The Greek (the Septuagint) is, in my thinking, closer to the original, being older than the Talmudic era Masoretic version.

Wow!!!

I'm not sure where to start on this jmdewey60.

I shall have to so do when I have more time..but for now I must make haste.

Orangetom

a reply to: orangetom1999

I'm not sure where to start on this . . .

Take your time.

btw: I just noticed that in my last post I wrote "moses" instead of Noah, oops.

I also noticed that the NIV goes along with my reading, where it says, "... among the people of his time ..."

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: colbe

No it doesn't, "prototokos" means eternal preexistance.

It doesn't.
It is a word in a verse that gets cited in the debate of whether Jesus is eternal or not.
That isn't proof that it means anything beyond its literal meaning of "firstborn".
This is what lexicons are for, to give word meanings for the Greek words in the original text.

John Salza, your "Catholic Apologist", is not an authority on theology or the Bible, but is an attorney.
Salza is the author of Masonry Unmasked, so is about on the same level as orangetom1999 's Gail Riplinger, author of Occult Bibles, with her degree in home economics.

John Salza, are you kidding? John among hundreds, non-Catholic Christian and Catholic Christians know its
meaning "prototokos" means eternal preexistance. You didn't bother to look at the Google search link
I included. There are 10 pages!!!

Jim, for years I talk to you about the Faith. I do, okay, far more important, God wants you to become Catholic.
Now it seems you're denying the Blessed Trinity. ???

God is going to ask you personally, could be 2017, maybe sooner.


Your Catholic friend, GBY,

colbe

a reply to: colbe

John Salza, are you kidding?

He is no authority just by the fact that he writes books.

John among hundreds, non-Catholic Christian and Catholic Christians know its
meaning "prototokos" means eternal preexistance. You didn't bother to look at the Google search link
I included. There are 10 pages!!!

That is just goofy, to say that you can type something into Google and because it shows hits, that what you typed is true.

Only God would say this, the reason the Jews wanted to kill Our Lord, they did not believe He is God.

How does Jesus deal with the Sabbath?

Jesus observes the Sabbath, but at the same time he deals with it very liberally, as one who has complete command over it: "The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath" (Mk 2:27).

The fact that Jesus claims the right to heal on the Sabbath and to interpret the Sabbath laws mercifully poses a dilemma for his Jewish contemporaries: Either Jesus is the Messiah sent by God, which makes him "Lord even of the sabbath" (Mk 2:28), or else he is merely a man, in which case his actions on the Sabbath are a sin against the Law.

a reply to: colbe

No...

the reason they wanted to kill him is because they misunderstood the fact that claiming to be the son of God does not mean he was claiming to be God

He gave the real law of the Sabbath, not the one given by man... It is ok to do good on the Sabbath...

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: colbe

John Salza, are you kidding?

He is no authority just by the fact that he writes books.

John among hundreds, non-Catholic Christian and Catholic Christians know its
meaning "prototokos" means eternal preexistance. You didn't bother to look at the Google search link
I included. There are 10 pages!!!

That is just goofy, to say that you can type something into Google and because it shows hits, that what you typed is true.[/quote

The underlined, this what you need more than anything to realize friend. By whose authority do you speak Jim Dewey? Your posts and commentary to God's revelation at ATS. You have NO God given authority, all personal opinion. Do you see why "private judgment" of the written Word is heresy?

What I post about God's revelation and the same for John Salza are Church teaching. God gave the RCC the authority to interpret the written Word and to interpret the Oral (tradition) teachings of the Apostles too. A person can know, its been passed down from the Apostles.

You are arguing with others here on a basic Christian teaching to be believed about Our Lord. He is God, Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. God has revealed this through His Church. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit want you to become Catholic dear brother.

Again, many a Protestant pastor converts to the Faith when he realizes about authority. Simple, they could no longer get up in front of their congregation to preach when their fellow pastor across the street was professing something else!

This is what you are doing here at ATS, daily. Come on, you are wiser, make a change in your life. Do not wait
until the "awakening."

GBY,

jmdewey60,

So, Christianity was not "fruit"?

Wow!! You had me doing back flips here with this. No...not at all..Christ is the fruit..first fruits.of them that slept.,

The purpose of faith is to act as a spiritual law of the heart to free us from committing sins, to be pure and righteous in our actions and lifestyle.

Wow!!! Let me make this a bit more clear or such that is stands out...faith verses Faith. For even the heathen have faith..and try to establish righteousness...and free themselves from sin. They even have trinity's.

Faith is because of His blood..and this awareness in our hearts of for whom He Shed His Saving Blood. Our righteousness is His Righteousness...not ours.

We will always be sinners..we cannot get away from sin in our body of flesh.

Jesus was born of a woman, in the flesh that we are also born to, weakened as it is by sin over the former age.

Wow!! Jesus was born of a woman..but not just any woman..a woman who knew not a man. For it is known that sin passes down the line of the man..not the woman. This is why he had to be born of a woman who knew not a man. That he could be born blameless...without sin. How we are born into this world as compared to Jesus means nothing.
This is back flip material you are posting here. But it is human. Think carefully about this.

"Traditions" were about Jesus, and those were utilized by him to fulfill his duties on earth as a righteous ruler.
The leadership was caught up in keeping the exclusivity of the kingdom that they thought they controlled.

I have been referring to and contrasting what is known as the "Traditions of Men" verses what the instructions from God were through Moses also known as The Law. Not just Traditions.

Agree with what the leadership was doing...yes....and it was whoredom on their part.

Sorry to burst your bubble but we are to present ourselves as a living sacrifice.
That means that we live unblemished lives to be presentable to God as an offering.

Wow!!! The only way this will happen is if when we stand before God He sees the Blood of Jesus covering us. For if He sees any other blood..on us...we are doomed. Not of works lest any man boast. We do not try to commit sin...or go after the ways of this world...but nonetheless...when we stand before God...none of our works are sufficient...But His Blood is more than Sufficient. For He is our Earnest Hope.

This is news to me. This must be a limited sized group who believe in what you are saying.
I have no idea how someone can purge someone else of a "covering of blood", especially if it is only just a metaphorical allusion to illustrate a literal thing that is just a historical fact.
If you mean getting rid of the teaching in church that there is a literal value to Jesus' blood that is a medium of exchange to pay for "sin guilt", then that is something else.

Yes..I mean exactly that...getting rid of the Church and it's Light. As Light and Blood are but two of His names..among many names for Him. For one thing is clear to those who can see, hear, and understand. They hate His Blood...and they hate his Light. When you come to know this world and its traditions after the god of this word..and his legions..they would like to replace this Light with light and His Blood with their blood and sacrifice.

Do you mean a literal race of people who are descended from a non-human species?
This is obviously wrong since the gospel is for everyone and we are to all be brothers without making racial distinctions.

The Blood War..or Ever War is the war which has been going on since the Garden of Eden...unto today.
The Gospel is not for everyone..it is for His people whom he separate out from the rest of the world. The Gospel is for them. Most of the world would like to get rid of the Gospel...this is clear in secular circles in particular. And in process of time the secular world will want to get rid of His people as well. The Gospel is certainly not for the fallen nor for those following the religion of the Fallen.

That is to establish that there is a such thing as a lord who is a human, that goes back to the original plan of how the world was supposed to work, if there was not the fall.
It isn't about there being competing races to take over the world.

Wow!! I am talking about one blood line here..and not races...nor race. The word after the god of this world ..prefers race and racism as the cloud behind which to conceal their intentions. Gods world does not mention race or racism as are want in the Traditions of Men to so do. Gods Word mentions race as to run a race or win a race..never as fallen men do by their tradition.

One bloodline is not a race in the traditions of men. Wow!! And in this case it is the only Blood which saves. Nothing here about the traditions of men. Wow!!

I do not spend my days watching people or looking at them through the prizm of Race and Racism. Nor do I want to so do or waste my time with the counterfeit traditions of men. When I look at a human being I want to know if they have God's spirit living in them. Are they covered by His Blood. Not by race or racism. I have no such interest in that counterfeit religion.

The shame of it is that we have ministers to day who only know how to look at men through the prizm of Race or Racism. They have bought into the counterfeiter...and they are ministers. Wow!!

Meaning, Jesus.
Paul would be the last person to sanction discrimination.

The only discrimination we are to make is to come out from amongst them and be ye separate sayeth the Lord. To not do as the nations surrounding Israel were want to do with their traditions. To do this we must know God's ways and His Judgements. This means we are to Judge using His ways and standards to know when and why to separate.

That the world does not want us to so do is a sign of the traditions of men...and their god..the counterfeiter.

"The blood" was a metaphorical device to make an analogy of a priesthood function that Jesus serves in heaven as our advocate and representative to allow the continued existence of the earth as all come to repentance.

Wow!! Negative. This Blood is what was given for us..and cannot be duplicated by any tradition of men. This is not metaphor...particularly when contrasted by the traditions of men and how they would whore us out to cheap substitutes...man made traditions.

This became clear to me when reading John Foxx and his Book of Martyrs.





Wow!!! Moses and his sons and their wives were the only righteous left in his generation. Not the most righteous..the only righteous left who had not "Fallen" to the traditions of men of those days. This is what is meant by he was perfect in his generations.

I do not need the Greek Seputuagint to know and understand this.

Jesus and The Word..never used the Talmud and in fact spoke against it if you know how to read His Word. Nor do you find other esoteric traditions of men in His Word.

Wow!!!

Orangetom

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: colbe

No...

the reason they wanted to kill him is because they misunderstood the fact that claiming to be the son of God does not mean he was claiming to be God

He gave the real law of the Sabbath, not the one given by man... It is ok to do good on the Sabbath...

Hi friend, sorry but I disagree, Jesus said many times I AM GOD. Give the people of Our Lord's time credit, they knew exactly what Our Lord was stating. The reason for some of them, for their mistaken anger.

Keeping the Sabbath is NO more. This is the New Covenant. Christians gather to worship God on Sunday, as John said on the "Lord's Day" to honor Our Lord's Resurrection.

How is it for centuries, Christians worldwide gather worship God on Sunday in all those buildings with steeples atop have it wrong? (ha!, humor) A help...

Christianity recognizes, they celebrates EASTER on Sunday. Hmmm, why would Christians do this? Bible Alone folks and all Christians take notice of these verses:

Matthew 28:1
And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre.

Mark 16:2
And very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they come to the sepulchre, the sun being now risen.


Mark 16:9
But he rising early the first day of the week, appeared first to Mary Magdalen, out of whom he had cast seven devils.


Luke 24:1
And on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared.


John 20:1
And on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalen cometh early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre; and she saw the stone taken away from the sepulchre.


The first Christians that were there at the tomb, knew Our Lord arose on Sunday. To honor Jesus all Christians celebrated His resurrection on EASTER SUNDAY. The first Christians knew what day Our Lord arose and passed this important info down. They called our Sunday, "the first day of the week."

And check this last verse, it also has "the first day of the week" included. Also notice, in the verse "Break bread", this is the first term for the most Holy Eucharist.


Acts Of Apostles 20:7
And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow: and he continued his speech until midnight.


Ignatius, third (3) Bishop of Antioch, who as a boy knew John the Apostle came up with the term "Eucharist", the word used today for Our Lord's presence in the consecrated host and wine. The first Christians gathered on Sunday to worship God and to receive the Eucharist.

Daniel's prophecy about the "continual sacrifice" comes true, this is the Holy "sacrifice" of the Mass in which Jesus comes down for you to receive Him in the Eucharist. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is offered every day, every hour all around the world in the New Covenant, see...since the beginning.


GBY,

a reply to: colbe

Hi friend, sorry but I disagree, Jesus said many times I AM GOD.

Hello...

No... he didn't say I AM God once...

Keeping the Sabbath is NO more. This is the New Covenant. Christians gather to worship God on Sunday, as John said on the "Lord's Day" to honor Our Lord's Resurrection.

Except they actually gathered on Friday at sundown, til Saturday at sundown for the Sabbath... why you would say the Sabbath is no more is beyond me...

How is it for centuries, Christians worldwide gather worship God on Sunday in all those buildings with steeples atop have it wrong? (ha!, humor) A help...

Likely because the church decided to change the first day of the week to Sunday to keep with the roman traditions...

And those buildings are just a sign of their power over the world... and have nothing to do with God, or Gods house...

Christianity recognizes, they celebrates EASTER on Sunday. Hmmm, why would Christians do this?

Traditions of men... kinda like hiding eggs from the easter bunny....

The first Christians that were there at the tomb, knew Our Lord arose on Sunday. To honor Jesus all Christians celebrated His resurrection on EASTER SUNDAY. The first Christians knew what day Our Lord arose and passed this important info down. They called our Sunday, "the first day of the week."

please see the above statement.... they called it the first day of the week because it is the first day of the week...

Jewish tradition still keeps the Sabbath as Friday evening til Saturday evening...

a reply to: Akragon

Akragon,

I do not have time to reply to your dividing up of my post. There would be 10 responses! Shssss.

Please keep my words together would you and reply underneath. Thanks!!!

The denial of some of the New Covenant cracks me up. They will not look at history and the fact Christianity
worships God on Sunday now, there is NO more Sabbath. And the first Christians knew what day it was for Heaven's sake. They gathered together on the "first day of the week." It is repeated in the Gospel.

Look at the "binding and loosing" verse. The Church whose first leader was Peter had the authority to change
the day of worship and the kind of worship which pleases God the Father very much, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

In the "awakening" coming from God, you will recall our discussion.


Take care,


p.s. Does your beloved friend attend Baptist church service on Sunday Akragon? Or, is she one of those home churchers?