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.

 

Hebrews6;- The promise to Abraham

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:03 AM
link   
a reply to: irenialilivenka


How is it work to save a life?

You would be a literal scumbag if you didn't save a life because it was the Sabbath.

And like I said, Jews today will make an exception on the Sabbath if it is a matter of life and death without violating the law.

Why is Jesus guilty of something even Rabbinical authorities don't consider breaking the law?


any effort aside from praising god was considered work in said times...


What food did he advocate eating that is such a big deal to you that you judge him guilty?

Did he eat meat sacrificed to Idols?
Strangled carrion?
Blood?


no idea what he ate... but he proclaimed all food clean

so there's no reason to believe he didn't eat whatever he wanted...

pork.. shellfish...

all good...





posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
I don't know how many Christians I meet who believe that we are all still under the law, how many still judge people, who condemn people, who use the Old Testament to poison the new testaments teachings of love with religion, legalism and self righteousness

My theory is that this has been the accidental by-product of the modern Protestant focus on the Bible. In the Middle Ages, there was neglect or over-use of allegory. In the nineteenth century, there was scepticism.
So Protestants insisted on taking the Bible seriously, which developed into taking the Bible literally.
Once Christians were taking the Old Testament literally, then of course they began drifting into legalism- and Zionism, for that matter.
It may be the case that the American mind has a rather legalistic/literalistic streak (I see it in other conspiracy theories), which might cause American fundamentalism to develop in that direction.

Incidentally, I don't engage in fruitless debate with the obsessive multiple account freak, so I won't get involved in that argument.
edit on 11-2-2017 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: irenialilivenka

That's the book of acts, that's when the Christian and Jewish community where growing and learning what Christianity was,how to understand the differences.
Like a scroll being unrolled and read, it becomes clearer as you learn and understand what is being taught

Yes there are contradictions in the bible that get clarified as the early church learns its responsibility to each other

But I guess it won't make sense to those who don't agree so it's a mute point

If you want to live the Jewish law, that's your buisness, if you don't, your buisness as well.

Remember Paul was attacked by an angry mob who wanted him dead because of their religion, just like Christ was killed because of religion

Jesus and Paul taught love, taught against the lawyers of the time, it seems we agree. Jesus died because He taught the law was being abused.

How you tie James in is anyone's guess



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: irenialilivenka


How is it work to save a life?

You would be a literal scumbag if you didn't save a life because it was the Sabbath.

And like I said, Jews today will make an exception on the Sabbath if it is a matter of life and death without violating the law.

Why is Jesus guilty of something even Rabbinical authorities don't consider breaking the law?


any effort aside from praising god was considered work in said times...


Not really. Maybe in Moses day, not Jesus'

They had a developed oral tradition that corrected unworthy passages of scripture by allegorical interpretation.

Maybe you could show me from the DSS, a contemporary collection of historical documents, that people were active in murdering people who saved lives on the Sabbath.

You sound just like Jesus enemies.

They were trying to entrap him, but failed.

He was not guilty, but punished anyway.




What food did he advocate eating that is such a big deal to you that you judge him guilty?

Did he eat meat sacrificed to Idols?
Strangled carrion?
Blood?


no idea what he ate... but he proclaimed all food clean

so there's no reason to believe he didn't eat whatever he wanted...

pork.. shellfish...

all good...



Assumptions that don't apply to the New Covenant anyway, so he was absolutely right in declaring all sustenance lawful.

Dietary law in the New Covenant was never violated. You are judging by old standards that Jesus simplified in a sensible manner.

Jesus ate shellfish...Good God no!!!



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: irenialilivenka

That's the book of acts, that's when the Christian and Jewish community where growing and learning what Christianity was,how to understand the differences.
Like a scroll being unrolled and read, it becomes clearer as you learn and understand what is being taught

Yes there are contradictions in the bible that get clarified as the early church learns its responsibility to each other

But I guess it won't make sense to those who don't agree so it's a mute point

If you want to live the Jewish law, that's your buisness, if you don't, your buisness as well.

Remember Paul was attacked by an angry mob who wanted him dead because of their religion, just like Christ was killed because of religion

Jesus and Paul taught love, taught against the lawyers of the time, it seems we agree. Jesus died because He taught the law was being abused.

How you tie James in is anyone's guess


What?

I was pretty clear, you are rambling nonsensically.

Also, I am not Jewish, James was and I am just explaining how Paul lied to him, as you requested I do so I did.


What about this comment is a fact based refutation of what I proved to you?

Nothing.

Again, as you requested, I supplied proof of the truth of what I said. You are trying to rationalize it away. Go ahead, I don't care.

Are you mad because I was successful?
edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:17 AM
link   
a reply to: irenialilivenka


Jesus ate shellfish...Good God no!!!


Sure man.... how could he not?

what one consumed doesn't matter... but what one spits out does




posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:17 AM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

I am inclined to think the cause is pop culture and ignorance, poor knowledge and teaching by those in ministry
As for not engaging in fruitless debates, I think I have something to learn from you

I was listening to a minister on YouTube , Bruxy Cavey, he explained that if you want to build muscles you go to a Gym daily, if you want to grow spiritually you study the word and live love every day



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: irenialilivenka


Jesus ate shellfish...Good God no!!!


Sure man.... how could he not?

what one consumed doesn't matter... but what one spits out does



Then what are we even debating?

You are judging the Prophet of the New Covenant by the Old.

Judge him by the New and you get a different verdict.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:20 AM
link   
a reply to: irenialilivenka

Yeah well ok, well done you.

Thanks but no thanks



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: irenialilivenka

Yeah well ok, well done you.

Thanks but no thanks


Your welcome.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman
I think the roots of the problem are much older than pop culture. However, pop culture and poor teaching make it much worse, because people lose contact with the more traditional Christian approaches. They try to strike out an independent line and lose their way.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: irenialilivenka

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: irenialilivenka


Jesus ate shellfish...Good God no!!!


Sure man.... how could he not?

what one consumed doesn't matter... but what one spits out does



Then what are we even debating?

You are judging the Prophet of the New Covenant by the Old.



Judge him by the New and you get a different verdict.


im not judging him at all... he factually did not keep said laws...

Thus.. he wasn't talking about them in the first place...

James solves this issue... the brother of the lord


edit on 11-2-2017 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: DISRAELI

I am inclined to think the cause is pop culture and ignorance, poor knowledge and teaching by those in ministry


Who is ignorant, has poor knowledge or is taught by ministry regarding your comment?

I assure you, none of those apply to me, or Akragon, he isn't stupid.

Who are you talking trash about?

I sense you are projecting.



As for not engaging in fruitless debates, I think I have something to learn from you


A fruitless debate? I was able to provide proof that I was speaking truth, what is fruitless about you learning something you didn't know, and asked me to educate you on?

I do and it's fruitless because you love Paul.

He was not an Apostle, never knew Jesus.



I was listening to a minister on YouTube , Bruxy Cavey, he explained that if you want to build muscles you go to a Gym daily, if you want to grow spiritually you study the word and live love every day


Cheap analogy. A fifth grade intellect could produce it.

And you complain about ministry but follow ministers on YouTube you know not on a personal level and think that cheap analogy is profound.

Really? I doubt you have read the Bible cover to cover or read it every day.

But if you want to learn something doing it everyday is OBVIOUSLY the best method, for almost anything.

I read, everyday, the Old, New, the Zohar and the Gospel of Barnabas and the Qur'an.

So I guess I am a spiritual giant.
edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

I also like to mix in some Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, and Gnostic Gospels and other scriptures from Nag Hammadi and the Pistis-Sophia. I have read it all, but I like to reread

Gospel of Bartholomew is excellent.

Gospel of Philip (Gnostic) is AWESOME.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: irenialilivenka

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: irenialilivenka


Jesus ate shellfish...Good God no!!!


Sure man.... how could he not?

what one consumed doesn't matter... but what one spits out does



Then what are we even debating?

You are judging the Prophet of the New Covenant by the Old.



Judge him by the New and you get a different verdict.


im not judging him at all... he factually did not keep said laws...

Thus.. he wasn't talking about them in the first place...

James solves this issue... the brother of the lord



He didn't keep laws because they were Old Covenant laws and weren't required to be kept, so ya kind of are judging him and by laws that don't apply.

Did he...not love God?

His neighbors?

Eat carrion, idol sacrificed-to-meat or raw bloody meat?

Engage in fornication?

If not (he didn't) then he didn't "not keep" any laws.

He was framed. Extraordinarily renditioned, and executed for crimes he didn't commit.

Maybe he was the Egyptian taught Sorcerer the Talmud says he was too.
edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

I think the concept of "New Covenant" is not being factored into your opinions, but it is the point of the book literally called the New Covenant (Testament is incorrect).

The stupid laws like death for gathering kindling do not apply to the New Covenant or Jesus, the innovator of said Covenant as a Prophet of God.

That only means, like Rabbinical Judaism and the earlier "Peshers" a reinterpretation of Mosaic Law, not a revocation.

You are judging a "Texan" by "New York" law, to use an analogy.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Dead Sea Scrolls 45. Portions of Sectarian Law
4Q265

On the Sabbath:

Let no one raise up an animal which has fallen into the water on the Sabbath day. But if a man who has fallen into the water on the Sabbath, one shall extend his garment to him to pull him out with it,...

So we have a contemporary document PROVING that the act of saving human life on the Sabbath is lawful.

Damascus Document:

They must keep the Sabbath day according to specification, and the holy days and the fast says according to the commandments of the members OF THE NEW COVENANT... Each one must love his brother as himself, support the poor...

Sectarian Charter Col.8 1QS, 4Q255-264a, 5Q11

In the society of the Yahad there shall be 12 laymen and three priests who are blameless (righteous, Zaddik or Pillar).
edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 06:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Any more to say about Jesus "the law breaker?"

I enjoy correcting errant notions.

Only thing I don't understand is why would you claim a violation of Mosaic Law without any knowledge of how first century Jews really interpreted it?

It is not like the NT gives an accurate portrayal of Judaism so you have to go elsewhere and historical documents like the DSS being so widely available, I don't know why you have never read them yet think you know first century Mosaic Law's interpretation.

You argue passionately only to be completely proven incorrect, I think you would want to avoid such things.

Maybe you need to up your knowledge by reading some other books, relying on the NT is not a great idea if you want facts about Jewish Law.

I don't mind debating issues because I am selective, I never enter a discussion without being the most informed participant unless I am among people more knowledgeable than myself that I can learn from.

But I am mostly autodidactic.

I recommend you do the same. You are so quick to remove Jesus Jewishness you overlook the fact that laws are always changing due to being open to interpretation.

The idea that Jesus broke the Law, yet fulfilled and advocated the Law, or that it was not based on Torah, is obviously not true.

That you do need only the Bible to learn.
edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

This is just a guess, and correct me if I am wrong, but you don't want Jesus to be the Messiah of the God of Moses, do you?

You are probably stuck in the literal interpretation of the Tanakh and don't know about the levels of interpretation or the esoteric meaning and are hung up on the violence.

I agree, disgusting ish, but Jesus WAS a Jew.

I think you would like the Qur'an, none of that disgusting ish but Jesus is honored as the Messiah and not God.

Give it a go. You don't need to be a Muslim but it sounds right up your alley.

I like it a lot.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Raggedyman
I think the roots of the problem are much older than pop culture. However, pop culture and poor teaching make it much worse, because people lose contact with the more traditional Christian approaches.


This is a solution, not a problem. Tradition is of men, even "traditional Christian approaches" which is the work of fools with no understanding of Jesus AT ALL.

Because it's not Christianity when Paul is involved, it's Paulianity.

The real problem is that the New Covenant is of Jesus which Paul cancels and contradicts left and right.

You place blame wherever you see fit, but two religions that contradict each other being combined is a recipe for disaster.

You know damn well the Apostles didn't believe Paul. You won't admit it, but you know it.



They try to strike out an independent line and lose their way.

That describes what Paul did better than I could have done.

Struck out independently?

Yep.

Lost his way?

If he ever had it, yep.
edit on 11-2-2017 by irenialilivenka because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join