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.

 

The three unclean spirits

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by sulaw
 


I am not shoving anything down anyone's throats.




posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Akragon
 


7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;

16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father



Jesus had to make the ascension to God after his physical death before he could come back down here as the Holy Spirit.

Just because Jesus said you will not see me does not mean that he is not here. It only means that they won't see him here.

Matthew 28:18-19

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

John 14:22-23

22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.


edit on 14-6-2013 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Deetermined
 


You're missing the point...

Jesus did not say he would be sending himself... but another entity...

Jesus did not say he was the Holy spirit... or the comforter that HE would be sending...

again... You're making connections that aren't there...

Then again you also believe he said I am God, which he didn't... so this is nothing new...




posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



again... You're making connections that aren't there...


again...you're making disconnections that aren't there...



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Akragon
 



again... You're making connections that aren't there...


again...you're making disconnections that aren't there...


Incorrect...

You see, it would be written as follows if he were speaking of himself...

7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, I will not come unto you again; but if I depart, I will return to you.

8 And when I have come again, I will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;

10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;

11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.

13 Howbeit when I have returned to you, the Spirit of truth, is come, I will guide you into all truth: for I shall not speak of myself; but whatsoever I shall hear, that shall I speak: and I will shew you things to come.

14 I shall glorify myself:
for I shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that I shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.


Now... How wrong is that version of John 16?




posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Let's compare some scripture...

John 16:13

13 Howbeit when I have returned to you, the Spirit of truth, is come, I will guide you into all truth: for I shall not speak of myself; but whatsoever I shall hear, that shall I speak: and I will shew you things to come.

John 14:17

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

John 14:23

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

I'm not sure I understand what your point is about John 16, because you and I obviously read it differently.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


John 16:14


14 I shall glorify myself: for I shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.


John 14:13

13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Akragon, how many verses in the Bible do you need to understand that Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is the one who will reside in us until Jesus is SEEN again and comes to live with us in the physical?

The Son is in the Father, you can't separate them.

Just like you can't separate God/Jesus from the Holy Spirit which resides in those who "keep his words", just like he said.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by truejew
 


What is your evidence of this "obvious forgery" that no one but you seems to see? And you've forgotten about the Silver Scrolls, from 600BC, which also contain the tetragrammaton.


The silver scrolls are amulets, they are not like the Dead Sea Scrolls.

What are you talking about? They are Hebrew Scripture, with YHWH in them, right where it is in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They pre-date the DSD by centuries, proving that YHWH wasn't "added in after the fact."


Where is your Scripture that says that the three unclean spirits are not born yet?

Where is your evidence that they are? The text itself is evidence that they are not, because those bowls all contain created things, which are created in sequence and are introduced to the world in sequence, end of story.


I did not claim to have one. What I said was that I did not admit what you claim I did.

I have asked you in the past directly if you had academic training in ancient languages and you did not claim to have. We know that Reckart has not, so yes, neither of you has been trained academically and cannot be taken as a credible source of information that has been proven false, with evidence, by people who are actual scholars in the field.

That's why Gary Reckart feels free to fabricate evidence, and to change the wording of the Bible -- because he has neither the expertise nor the training to properly respect the field, so he just does what he wants, curses those who disagree with him or point out his charlatanism and convinces no one but the ignorant and himself that he's brilliant.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   
I saw this posted on Reckart's blog today. Care to explain why he would use such an offensive term?


In case you've never heard the term before:


Verb
jew down (third-person singular simple present jews down, present participle jewing down, simple past and past participle jewed down)

(offensive) To bargain or haggle with a seller in order to obtain a lower price for a good or service.

Usage notes
This term is considered offensive, as it is based on a stereotype considered offensive. (Source)

Your "good man" sounds like a racist and a bigot. What a fine example this pastor sets for his flock.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by truejew
 


What are you talking about? They are Hebrew Scripture, with YHWH in them, right where it is in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They pre-date the DSD by centuries, proving that YHWH wasn't "added in after the fact."


They are silver and found in use as amulets. Amulets would have been used by those who followed Baal. They would not have been used by those who follow the true God. YHWH amulets are still found today used in witchcraft.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 



The 2004 team described the scrolls as "one of most significant discoveries ever made" for biblical studies.[6] Apart from their significance for our knowledge of the development of the Hebrew alphabet, the scrolls "preserve the earliest known citations of texts also found in the Hebrew Bible and ... the earliest examples of confessional statements concerning Yahweh." The reference to Yahweh as "Rebuker of Evil," found in later incantations and amulets associated with Israel, is evidence that these artifacts were also amulets.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


I am not Pastor Reckart. Go ask him.

I will say though, that you have not exactly separated yourself from using offensive terms. Some examples would be "idiot", "jerkwad", "hillbilly pastor"...



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by truejew
 



The 2004 team described the scrolls as "one of most significant discoveries ever made" for biblical studies.[6] Apart from their significance for our knowledge of the development of the Hebrew alphabet, the scrolls "preserve the earliest known citations of texts also found in the Hebrew Bible and ... the earliest examples of confessional statements concerning Yahweh." The reference to Yahweh as "Rebuker of Evil," found in later incantations and amulets associated with Israel, is evidence that these artifacts were also amulets.


en.wikipedia.org...


As I said, they were used as amulets.

They are also from the time period that the Jews were corrupted by Baal worship and other sins which would lead to their captivity.
edit on 14-6-2013 by truejew because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 


What you said is that they were used by those who followed Ba'al.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 


Are you still trying to say that YHWH is Ba'al?



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by truejew
 


What you said is that they were used by those who followed Ba'al.


Yes, the Jews did follow Baal during that time period. It led to their captivity.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by adjensen
 


I am not Pastor Reckart. Go ask him.

I honestly do not care -- I've realized that he's a jerk and a phony long ago. Being a bigot is new, but not surprising. I pointed it out to see if you would condemn that post of his, and I'm also not surprised to see that you didn't.


I will say though, that you have not exactly separated yourself from using offensive terms. Some examples would be "idiot", "jerkwad", "hillbilly pastor"...

I am not a pastor, neither do I claim to be a "Bishop", "Doctor", or "Cohen". Anyone who looks to me for guidance in decorum is, well... an idiot, lol. But I am not a bigot.

The "good man" that you follow, respect and allow yourself to be moulded by is a racist and a bigot. And you don't seem to have a problem with that. Guess what that makes you?


edit on 14-6-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 


You do realize it was YHWH who told them to turn away from Ba'al worship or suffer the consequences, don't you?

YHWH is not Ba'al.

All of the Ba'al gods were referred to as "false gods" in the Hebrew Bible.

You might want to look up the list of those.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by adjensen
 


I am not Pastor Reckart. Go ask him.

I honestly do not care -- I've realized that he's a jerk and a phony long ago. Being a bigot is new, but not surprising. I pointed it out to see if you would condemn that post of his, and I'm also not surprised to see that you didn't.


I will say though, that you have not exactly separated yourself from using offensive terms. Some examples would be "idiot", "jerkwad", "hillbilly pastor"...

I am not a pastor, neither do I claim to be a "Bishop", "Doctor", or "Cohen". Anyone who looks to me for guidance in decorum is, well... an idiot, lol. But I am not a bigot.

The "good man" that you follow, respect and allow yourself to be moulded by is a racist and a bigot. Guess what that makes you?



You are in no position to judge someone as a bigot when you have been seen as a bigot yourself.

As for your claim that I am a bigot... Prove it. I have not only not used such terms, but have spoken out against your use of them.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by truejew
 


You do realize it was YHWH who told them to turn away from Ba'al worship or suffer the consequences, don't you?

YHWH is not Ba'al.

All of the Ba'al gods were referred to as "false gods" in the Hebrew Bible.

You might want to look up the list of those.


It was EhJeh who told them to turn away from Baal, not YHWH.
edit on 14-6-2013 by truejew because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join