What Jerusalem?

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by Deetermined

 

What game? You have all the necessary verses there. Whether you call yourself Yahweh's, or Jacob's or [first name] Israel. There is only one Yahweh. Not 2, not 3.

But I'm not Yahweh's, or Jacob's or [pthena] Israel. I am a heathen Gentile who has a Father Heaven.

edit on 4-6-2013 by pthena because: (no reason given)

Trinity = Body+Spirit+Soul. Elohim is not a hard concept to grasp. Man was made in his image. I am one being, but inside this mortal shell i have a spirit and a soul.

Rules on "Prophets"

Numbers 12: 5 Yahweh came down in a pillar of cloud, and stood at the door of the Tent, and called Aaron and Miriam; and they both came forward. 6 He said, “Hear now my words. If there is a prophet among you, I Yahweh will make myself known to him in a vision. I will speak with him in a dream. 7 My servant Moses is not so. He is faithful in all my house. 8 With him I will speak mouth to mouth, even plainly, and not in riddles; and he shall see Yahweh’s form.

So prophets get riddles and dreams, but Moses sees Yahweh's form and gets straight talk.
Deduced rule: If it seems like it is contrary to Moses, it probably is.

Deuteronomy 13: 1 If there arise in the midst of you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and he give you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or the wonder come to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, “Let us go after other gods” (which you have not known) “and let us serve them;” 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet, or to that dreamer of dreams: for Yahweh your God proves you, to know whether you love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 You shall walk after Yahweh your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and you shall serve him, and cling to him. 5 That prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death, because he has spoken rebellion against Yahweh your God,

Yahweh will seemingly give good intel to foreign god prophets.
Rule: Even if the thing happens, kill the prophet anyway.

Deuteronomy 18:20 But the prophet, who shall speak a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.”

21 If you say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which Yahweh has not spoken?” 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh, if the thing doesn't follow, nor happen, that is the thing which Yahweh has not spoken: the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you shall not be afraid of him.

If a prophet speaking "in the Yahweh's name" or another god's name foretells an event and it doesn't happen then don't fear him or what he says but just kill him.

Jeremiah

I find it fairly sad that Jeremiah falls into one of the categories of prophets to be killed, because I've always kind of liked the narrative parts, and the fact that he was bending over backwards to save Jerusalem from destruction, even going so far as to be considered a traitor to Judah and a friend of Babylon.

But,

Jeremiah 25:9 I will send to Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land, and against its inhabitants, and against all these nations around; and I will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and a hissing, and perpetual desolations. 10 Moreover I will take from them the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the millstones, and the light of the lamp. 11 This whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. 12 It shall happen, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, says Yahweh, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans; and I will make it desolate forever.

But the Babylonians didn't devastate the whole land. Many of the inhabitants remained and were granted vineyards and farms to live on and work. Gedaliah was appointed governor over the land and people.

Babylon did not last 70 years, it was taken by Cyrus in 539 BC. Babylon, and it's land was not made into a desolation forever either. Babylon became the capital city of the 9th Satrapy, of the Persian empire as well as a center of learning and scientific advancement.

Why this matters is that the collection of writings ascribed to Jeremiah includes his official letter to the Judeans and Levites who were already in Babylon under a previous partial deportment. The letter is to silence false prophets who were instigating rebellion inside Babylon. And this letter is where the mention of a return after 70 years occurs.

Jeremiah 29:9 For they prophesy falsely to you in my name: I have not sent them, says Yahweh. 10 For thus says Yahweh, After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. ...14 I will be found by you, says Yahweh, and I will turn again your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places where I have driven you, says Yahweh; and I will bring you again to the place from where I caused you to be carried away captive.

To continue on with Jeremiah:

Jeremiah 50 - NIV
50 This is the word the Lord spoke through Jeremiah the prophet concerning Babylon and the land of the Babylonians[a]:

2 “Announce and proclaim among the nations,
lift up a banner and proclaim it;
keep nothing back, but say,
‘Babylon will be captured;
Bel will be put to shame,
Marduk filled with terror.
Her images will be put to shame
and her idols filled with terror.’
3 A nation from the north will attack her
and lay waste her land.
No one will live in it;
both people and animals will flee away.

But this did not happen either. Bel was not put to shame and neither was Marduk filled with terror. On the contrary, Bel loved the new ruler Cyrus, and Marduk induced the Babylonians to accept him, so he endeavored to daily worship Marduk.

And even if, for some reason, Yahweh who spoke plainly to Moses forbidding that the abominable city ever be rebuilt, somehow "changed his mind" about the city, and 70 years was the magic time, Marduk worshipping Messiah Cyrus issued his decree after only 50 years. That's a bit of a jumping the gun.

Marduk worshipping Messiah Cyrus had determined to restore all the gods to there rightful territories, and have their houses rebuilt at the empire's expense. This is the context for Isaiah 45. Whoever wrote this piece of literary political sycophancy had a very obvious agenda.

Two possibilities really. Either convince Marduk worshipping Messiah Cyrus to abandon all his plans of restoring all the gods, and instead only restore Jerusalem and temple, thus showing gross favoritism. Or, the other possibility being to serve the propaganda for domestic(Jewish) consumption, as a way of justifying the blatant disregard for Moses.

In the process, Isaiah 45 also invents a new god, one who claims to be the one and only god of everything, rather than the Yahweh of Moses, who was god of a tribe and territory, and recognized the existence of the other gods. This is the introduction of a strange god, unknown to the fathers. Another grosser violation of worshipping Yahweh the clan god alone. This new Yahweh is not the same Yahweh.

reply to post by pthena

In the process, Isaiah 45 also invents a new god, one who claims to be the one and only god of everything, rather than the Yahweh of Moses, who was god of a tribe and territory, and recognized the existence of the other gods. This is the introduction of a strange god, unknown to the fathers. Another grosser violation of worshipping Yahweh the clan god alone. This new Yahweh is not the same Yahweh.

There is no "new" god. Only the one that has always existed.

Isaiah 45:22-24

22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.

24 Surely, shall one say, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.

Philippians 2:5-11

5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Remember, Jesus is the Word that came out of God's mouth, just like it says in Isaiah 45:23.

John 1:14

14 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.

reply to post by pthena


The 70 years is referring to the Babylon Empire which started in 609 BC with the defeat of the Assyrian Empire through 539 BC with the defeat of the Babylonian Empire.

reply to post by Deetermined

The 70 years is referring to the Babylon Empire which started in 609 BC with the defeat of the Assyrian Empire through 539 BC with the defeat of the Babylonian Empire.

I did a Google search using the term "70 years spoken of by Jeremiah", and sure enough, one of the hits is a site saying that it means the length of time of Babylonian rule.
The point of this post is that this is a new interpretation to me and it makes me suspicious that this is a retroactive correction by people wanting to support a certain scheme about prophetic timelines.

It is the stone in the city of Jerusalem that is important. The one from Solomon's temple.

reply to post by jmdewey60


The year 609 BC is right in line with the Battle of Megiddo.

Which is significant with the upcoming and future battle of "Armageddon", which in Hebrew means "Mountain of Megiddo".

reply to post by rickymouse


It's amazing how it's all connected, isn't it?

Megiddo was a site of great importance in the ancient world. It guarded the western branch of a narrow pass and trade route connecting Egypt and Assyria. Because of its strategic location, Megiddo was the site of several historical battles. The site was inhabited from approximately 7000 BC to 586 BC (the same time as the destruction of the First Israelite Temple in Jerusalem by the Babylonians, and subsequent fall of Israelite rule and exile). Since this time it has remained uninhabited, preserving ruins pre-dating 586 BC without settlements ever disturbing them.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Deetermined

There is no "new" god. Only the one that has always existed.

Isaiah 45:22-24

And quoting from the new fabricated god proves what, exactly?


I defended Paul for many years because he is the target for the people who want to tear Christianity down, and leave only monotheism(Judaic or Muslim). I recently stopped supporting Paul because I detected that his self identified mission was for the post-exile god. Pretty ironic I'd say.

The Hymn that Paul quotes in Philippians has pre-existing Pagan sources, and actually is a contradiction of the Isaiah 45 statement. By the time Paul wrote Romans, he had in his own mind reconciled the two. That is unfortunate. The doctrine of Trinity arises from that synthesis.

The Isaiah 45 god is pure monotheism. It is an exercise in madness to use that god as part of a trinity.

reply to post by pthena


I'm sorry that you don't understand what you're reading. I've tried to lay it out for you the best that I knew how, sometimes we just have to wait for the Holy Spirit to talk in order to understand.

reply to post by jmdewey60

The point of this post is that this is a new interpretation to me and it makes me suspicious that this is a retroactive correction by people wanting to support a certain scheme about prophetic timelines.

Post freely. I was angry before, because of reading what the naysayers were writing about me. I suppose it was their intention to cause me anger. They should be proud that they succeeded.

So much editing and insertions have gone into the Jeremiah work since the times of Jeremiah that it would be a lifetime's work to try to untangle it all. Jeremiah is actually my favorite of Old Testament characters. I would be sad to think he had actually written all those curses against people.

reply to post by Deetermined

The year 609 BC is right in line with the Battle of Megiddo.

People have wondered why Josiah would fight against Egypt instead of against Assyria.

I think he wanted Assyria to penetrate deep into Egypt to destroy the temple of Yahweh at Elephantine so that Jerusalem temple would be the only Yahweh temple in the World.

reply to post by Deetermined

I'm sorry that you don't understand what you're reading. I've tried to lay it out for you the best that I knew how,

I don't recall that you've even addressed the issue of whether or not the rebuilding of Jerusalem in violation of the explicit command in Moses is justified.

reply to post by pthena


I ordered the two volume Word biblical commentary on Jeremiah two days ago, when I saw that as being key to some people's predictions on the temple thing.
I should be getting those in a few days and I can get a better feel for what is going on in these verses being cited.
I agree on the editing business.
I have posted before on this forum that there are parts of Jeremiah that are not in the Septuagint, which is an old book.
Some people think that the Hebrew is older but that is not always the case, and what we call the Old Testament was not finalized until around the time that the New Testament was canonized.

reply to post by pthena


Once again, I don't understand what you're asking here. Can you elaborate or point out some scripture to me?

reply to post by jmdewey60

Maybe the commentary will show some break down of authorship. All those oracular curses against just about every group of people just doesn't quite fit the narrative character of Jeremiah.

Look at this:

Galatians 2: 15 “We, being Jews by nature, and not Gentile sinners, 16 yet knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law, because no flesh will be justified by the works of the law. 17 But if, while we sought to be justified in Christ, we ourselves also were found sinners, is Christ a servant of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I build up again those things which I destroyed, I prove myself a law-breaker. 19 For I, through the law, died to the law, that I might live to God.

Is it possible that the saying of rebuilding what was destroyed, could have been a Pharisee saying? Could Paul have gone through the spiritual exercise of finding himself doomed under Moses for making statements on behalf of god? So, by dying to the Law, has he changed from Moses Yahweh worship to post-exile Yahweh worshp?

And later, by the time he wrote Romans, has he fully accepted post-exile to the extent that he found no problem with Jerusalem being World center for Christianity?

I know that's a lot of questions, but I'm just trying to understand why Paul seems to change his attitude so radically?

reply to post by Deetermined

Can you elaborate or point out some scripture to me?

It's in the OP. Moses clearly states that the city destroyed because of following other gods should remain as a heap , and never be rebuilt.

Jerusalem fits that definition. The existence of various groups of prophets claiming contradictory messages is fairly well established. Just because some oracles of some of these prophets ended up in the Canon does not automatically mean they are valid as far as Moses goes.

The people who claim Moses as their Lawgiver should never have accepted as valid those things which contradict Moses. They should have not rebuilt Jerusalem no matter what some prophet said.

The only valid way of overriding Moses is if the new prophet like Moses who sees god face to face gives a new law. Christians claim Jesus to be that prophet. Jesus did not find anything so important about Jerusalem, that it would have to exist.

John 4: 21 Jesus said to her, "“Woman, believe me, the hour comes, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, will you worship the Father. 22 You worship that which you don’t know. We worship that which we know; for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such to be his worshippers. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”"

25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah comes,” (he who is called Christ). “When he has come, he will declare to us all things.”

26 Jesus said to her, "“I am he, the one who speaks to you.”"

If the Messiah is the only legitimate person to rebuild the city and temple. And the Messiah himself thinks such things are irrelevant, then what are Christians doing messing about with such things?

reply to post by pthena

Is it possible that the saying of rebuilding what was destroyed, could have been a Pharisee saying?

I don't have the answer to that question.

In Galatians 2, Paul has a problem with Peter for the fact that the Jews were still practicing Mosaic Law after Christ's death. I think Paul thought that going back to the old laws was a sin, however, we also know that later Paul practiced the Jewish customs when he was with the Jews and he didn't when he was with the Gentiles. He did what they did when he was with them. Which was pretty much what Jesus did too. He went along with the customs of the people wherever he happened to be. There were arguments among the disciples about what the laws were and who should follow them. Personally, I believe that Jesus didn't get involved or teach about it because it was no issue to him. He may have just left it up to them to decide for themselves what they felt kept them close to God and defined them as a people.

Does that help to answer your question at all?

reply to post by pthena

If the Messiah is the only legitimate person to rebuild the city and temple. And the Messiah himself thinks such things are irrelevant, then what are Christians doing messing about with such things?

The Christians aren't, but the Jews still are because they haven't accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior....yet.

The Jews have more trials to go through before they recognize Jesus as the Son of God. As Christians, all we know is that the Bible says it will all happen again. History will keep repeating itself until they come to the realization about Jesus.