It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

1987 years failure of Christianity to build God's kingdom. Jesus' teaching recorded correctly?

page: 17
9
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 04:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Father is proper, "call no MAN father for you have one Father in Heaven."

Yeshua says it is cool. I like Most High, Father is cool too but I am a big Apocrypha reader and they use Most High usually.

Anything besides jehovah.




posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 04:08 AM
link   
a reply to: enterthestage


Yehoshua is a compound name consisting of two parts:
The first part is the “prefix” form of the Tetragrammaton—God’s Four-Letter Name: Yod-He-Vav-He or YHVH.In the Hebrew Bible “Yeho-” is used at the beginning of certain proper names: Jehoshaphat, Jehoiachin, Jehonathan (In Medieval English the letter “J” was pronounced as “Y”). The “suffix” form of the Tetragrammaton is “-yah” (“-iah” in Greek, as in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zechariah, or Halleluiah).
The second part is a form of the Hebrew verb yasha which means to deliver, save, or rescue.
Symbolically, the name Yehoshua/Yeshua/Jesus conveys the idea that God (YHVH) delivers or saves (his people).


link



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 04:15 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

I don't care what you produce about Jesus name in Hebrew or its claimed meaning.

Didn't I just say that I know it's popular to say his name means that? I definitely did.

So why the need to cite the definition of something I just said that I know?

I am saying it is a fake definition and really just means salvation. I know a billion people will disagree and don't care.

So you are not reading my messages obviously and just want to post something to look like you are telling me something I don't know even though I literally just said I do know and I disagree.

Not gonna work bro.



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 05:24 AM
link   
guys you don't have to quarrel on something that took centuries en.wikipedia.org...

It is clear what is translated in our Bibles is translation, and we'd be lucky if we get to the core issues even thru those imperfect translations. The bigger problem is, what never made it thru the scrutiny of the later gospel writers.

We have to accept God's kingdom as children if we want to enter into it.

Cheers with that nice Jewish song To Life L'Haim
www.youtube.com...



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 05:51 AM
link   
a reply to: enterthestage

It'seems popular because it's a fact. Yeshua/Yehoshua is a compound name, there isn't any way to get around that fact. The Hebrew word for salvation is "yasha", and that's the second part of His compound Name. If His Name meant salvation only it would be Yasha and not Yeshua/Yehoshua. You cannot ignore the first half of His compound Name, that's being deceptive.



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

So going from yesha (salvation) to the slightest change in pronunciation of YeshUa makes it etymologically related to Yahweh?


I think you are just believing what you hear and I don't see the Yah in Yesha or YeshUa because U and Yah are different sounds and not synonymous.

Yeshuyah would be his name if that was the case.



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: enterthestage

Yeshua/Yeshu (Jews call Jesus "Yeshu") is a nickname or shortened form of Yehoshua. Yehoshua is the Hebrew for Joshua. You already affirmed His name was Joshua, therefore the non shortened Name of Jesus is Yehoshua, which is a compound Name.

Yah/Yeh + Shua = Yah is salvation



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

People try and make his name Yahshua which according to Messianic Judaism is not a correct Hebrew name and is done specifically to insert Yah into his name.

Because Yeshua only means salvation or he saves.

To say it means Yah saves is to define it in religious terms but it is just a tradition that is factually incorrect. Religion only cares about appearance and not truth.

The truth is Yeshua means "he saves" and yesha means "salvation".

Insert Yah all you want and believe what you are told but I am telling you that Yah is not a part of the name or its meaning.



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   

A few months before he died, one of the nation’s most prominent rabbis, Yitzhak Kaduri, supposedly wrote the name of the Messiah on a small note which he requested would remain sealed until now. When the note was unsealed, it revealed what many have known for centuries: Yehoshua, or Yeshua (Jesus), is the Messiah. With the biblical name of Jesus, the Rabbi and kabbalist described the Messiah using six words and hinting that the initial letters form the name of the Messiah. The secret note said: Concerning the letter abbreviation of the Messiah’s name, He will lift the people and prove that his word and law are valid. This I have signed in the month of mercy, Yitzhak Kaduri The Hebrew sentence (translated above in bold) with the hidden name of the Messiah reads: Yarim Ha’Am Veyokhiakh Shedvaro Vetorato Omdim ירים העם ויוכיח שדברו ותורתו עומדים The initials spell the Hebrew name of Jesus יהושוע . Yehoshua and Yeshua are effectively the same name, derived from the same Hebrew root of the word “salvation” as documented in Zechariah 6:11 and Ezra 3:2. The same priest writes in Ezra, “Yeshua (ישוע) son of Yozadak” while writing in Zechariah “Yehoshua (יהושוע) son of Yohozadak.” The priest adds the holy abbreviation of God’s name, ho (הו), in the father’s name Yozadak and in the name Yeshua. www.israeltoday.co.il...

edit on 24-8-2016 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)


With that being said, although still controversial among Jewish scholars, I think it is quite a big step towards acceptance by Jews of Jesus as Messiah ben Joseph.

The bigger problem would be, how the Christians would accpet the Messiah ben David if they were indoctrinated for centuries that anyone who comes and claims so would be antichrist. It is crazy because it is not said in that way in the Bible or in the Gospel or in the Revelation.

Therefore, I offer the idea of a new doctrine to be researched and established, based on the Revelation text of the 144,000 young male Jews who are to come in the time period between Jesus' first coming and the rising of the beast. Certainly among them will be many notorious leaders, may be all of them, and there is no problem for one of them to fulfill the mission of the expected by the Jews Messiah ben David.

As far as the Second Coming of Jesus is concerned, and the preceding 3.5 year final reign of the "beast", Jesus himself said, no one knows the day or the hour, neither He nor the angels in heaven but only the Father. How then could we estimate when the beast is supposedly to arrive, or to blame any holy man/men to be antichrists, when they come to do good and so to speak to save humanity from its worst moment in history after the flood.
edit on 24-8-2016 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: enterthestage

But nobody is certain how to write or pronounce YHWH since the vowels are inferred, as they don't appear in the Tenakh. Some say Yahweh, some say Yahveh, and some say it's Yehovah. I've seen some sacred name cultists try to assert that it's Yahshua or some variant, but that's not a Hebrew name and certainly isn't Aramaic.



posted on Aug, 29 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Is conversion possible in history? Those young people who sing the Israeli anthem, are not personally responsible for the evil doings of their great grandfathers Nazi. Still they make a historical reparation to the people and state of Israel.

The Catholic Church did many things for reconciliation between Jews and Christians in the last century. The memories are not so fresh of several centuries ago when it were the Catholic Church servicemen the main persecutors of Israeli people across medieval Europe.

Still, in minds of many sincere believers who are not well educated in history or theology, the division lines exist, although without the medieval hatred anymore. Therefore, more is needed to be done by the Catholic (and other) churches to overcome the centuries old negativity and to make historical reparation to the Jewish people. And to be clearly said by theological point of view that the Israeli people were and are God's chosen nation. The Christians are a branch of the tree (of faith), according to St Paul, not the tree itself. It should be made clear that all the Jewish people who lived for the last 20 centuries, ARE NOT GUILTY of the death of Jesus Christ.

It is a must do by the Catholic and other churches, exactly to restrain to maximum the so called antichrist in his expected actions against the Jewish people. Do the Catholic and other churches stay on the side of God's people, or on the side of the adversary, that so many end times theories call the antichrist? Although I think personally the time is not now, but after too many years to be counted, I may be wrong. If the time is now, the people and churches must choose their side. It wil be the ultimate failure of the Christian churches if after 20 centuries Christianity and spreading the Gospel of Love (as they claim to do) they fall in the cunning deceitful trap of the antichrist to line up against, not for God's chosen people Israel.

God did not send Jesus Christ to change the promises of God given to Abraham! The Catholic priests repeat in every solemn liturgy prayer N1, "Abraham our father in faith". Then we ought to call the Jewish people "our brethren in faith", even our "older brethren", as St John Paul II said many times. Because, the Christians appear as children of Abraham by adoption in faith and not by blood, mostly. A new doctrine Jewish-related is needed ASAP to substitute older doctrines that were neither dogmas nor corresponded to the facts of history.
edit on 29-8-2016 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: ReAppollonius



Text If it is not a place you can't go to it so if you are somewhere (everywhere) than you can't be at "not a place" which deprives the Kingdom of God of its meaning in the form of a location. If the Kingdom is not a place it can't be here or there, within or without. But Jesus does say that the Kingdom of God is within and without and without is a place. The Kingdom of God is everywhere and nowhere isn't the Kingdom of God. You reduce the Kingdom to a set of rules or even feelings which is not its ordained purpose. You are in the Kingdom of God right now and will be when you get to Heaven as on earth.

The kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are not the same. The kingdom of God is the celestial spirituality within a soul while the kingdom of heaven is the celestial New Jerusalem. The City "New Jerusalem" is a celestial physicality or better yet a heavenly piece of real estate.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart

We care about the clear signs that God has given us that the end is upon us. Such signs are profitable to Christians. For example the Christians in Jerusalem fled the city when the Roman armies briefly pulled back after surrounding it. They heeded the words of Jesus to flee to the hills.

As a result they were saved from the horrors of that siege. In the same way we can prepare for the one world government under antichrist and the mark of the beast. I do believe it will be a literal person as it was in the past.

Whether or not Christian temples (ie people) are desecrated is not the issue. The issue is what has God revealed to us to be the signs of the times. One of the big signs that have been fulfilled is the rebirth of Israel itself.



posted on Sep, 2 2016 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: SevenThunders

I believe too we are nearing a major change, the biggest after the Flood. Not necessarily a Second Coming though. You mentioned correctly the flee of Jews from Jerusalem in 70 AD. So we have a gap of 1900 years, and preterist fulfillment that we know is not the final one.

Meanwhile, we have to answer the demands of the time. As Columbus answered the demands of his time. He believed he discovered the Eden garden in the 4 -river delta of Orinoco, and wrote about that to then pope (whose name I don't know). Obviously he was wrong in his assessment, but he was right to discover the new continent. That of course has nothing to do with the conquistadors and the destruction of native cultures.

Will the Church today embrace for change, or despite all the talks it will remain in the middle ages? I don;t have the answer. As I read influential private Catholic sources, such as Spiritdaily, spiritdaily.com... demonizing aliens etc, I lose any hope of change to happen from the top. Perhaps millions of Catholics (and others) will opt for change despite not because of position of hierarchy.



posted on Sep, 5 2016 @ 04:36 AM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart

The silence of the Roman Catholic Church (and others) on these questions is strange. They cannot pretend anymore there isn't such thing, when it is posted (far not only by me) in the public internet domain, when everyone coud discover it upon the click of google with appropriate search keywords. Most of the questions raised in this and other threads, the Catholic Church leaders opt to not give any answers. Few are being answered indeed, especially when it comes to the contemporary charitable role of Catholic organizations, such as that of Mother Teresa. Good but not good enough for a billion plus wide church that pretends to be the leader of Christianity in 21st century. I will not repeat old posts. What we see, is too little too late, despite good intentions of leaders to show a new face. Let they be fast to show it, before the events befall the humanity. If they care for Catholic church to exist after that.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart
You've missed the forest through the trees, in part by being distracted with those telling exciting entertaining stories about the year 2012 (seeing your name).





posted on Sep, 15 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

instead of posting long vids that frankly i don't have time to watch, why don't you argue better your position in understandable way?



posted on Sep, 15 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn has warned that Europe risks forfeiting its “Christian inheritance” and that an “Islamic conquest” could be in its future. “On this day, 333 years ago, Vienna was saved,” he said. “Will there now be a third attempt at an Islamic conquest of Europe? Many Muslims think so and long for it and say: This Europe is at an end.” Cardinal Schönborn, a confidante of Pope Francis, warned the congregation in the Cathedral of Vienna on Sunday, that Europe had “squandered and wasted” its Christian inheritance, just like the younger brother in the parable told by Christ. www.the-tidings.com...



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 02:51 AM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart
Cause some people seem to have enough time to post thousands of comments. So is it time or interest that's the issue? 2 Timothy 4:3,4 describes it as 'not putting up with', you don't want to hear it anyway, it's not 'tickling your ears', what you want to hear. Why would I waste too much time on repeating things I've spoken about before on ATS that hardly anybody wants to hear or even think about? Not that I don't do so on other occasions and in other comments.
edit on 18-9-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

what is your argument, and at what part of my post? Please be more precise. I value different opinion backed by some reasoning. That is all about to be in a forum, to state your position and back it with some facts or whatever else.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join