The Apostles and Eternal Hell Teachings

[Amanda]

nothing = everything.  That is, "nothing" would be a lack of definition, or difference, or context.  And as things can only "exist" (or mean) in comparison to other things, "nothing" would also mean non-existance.

 

So, nothing doesn't exist.  It's non existance.  Just like the concept of "everything".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cerise, for further clarification, are you saying that 'everything' exists, and we know that because 'nothing' would be what it was, if 'everything' didn't exist? If that is so, I am trying to understand your original post:

 

"Jesus can't be everything without also becoming nothing. Just like a word can't mean everything without conversely meaning nothing at all. When we exist, we do so in difference, in relation to the other.

 

Who is the other of Jesus?"

 

It seems to me that when we exist, we can define it or understand it by its difference or in comparison of others... yet it does not become others. I may be defined as a female by my difference and or comparison to a male, but I don't become the male. 'Nothing' would be included in 'everything' but 'everything' would not be included in nothing. So what do you mean?

[Amanda]

QED is latin.  It's what funky math dudes used to put at the end of equations to show that they'd solved the problem.  The latin equivalent of "so there."

 

Can just part of an ultimate truth still be a truth?

 

If I said that I was going to go out, but that was only partly true and really the rest of the truth is "I'm going out...tomorrow" isn't my partial truth as good as a lie?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cerise, maybe it is not a lie, but perhaps it doesn't make sense till we can put it ALL together.

[Ouroboros]

Could you be so kind, again, to tell me what QED means?

Latin. quod erat demonstrandum (which was to be demonstrated)

 

Or one of these:

 

Quality Education Drive

Quality Electricals Direct

Quality Environment For Dartford

Quality Evaluation Division

Quantum Electro Dynamics

Queen Elizabeth Dearie

Quick Easy Dirty

Quietly Eating Donuts

Quite Easily Done

[SkepticOfBible]

Hello Pritish!

The sacrifice of the lamb was portrayed in the OT as a shadow of things to come, even in the Exodus of Moses, IMO. Jesus knew he had to sacrifice himself, he that was immensely spiritually adept concerning the metaphysical aspects of life, in a way that has never been attained until then... could only do what is proposed by the NT in dwelling in our conscience and making our self the new temple, ending OT's request for continued sacrifices. God is no longer perceived as just 'out there', I've heard the term used here 'sky daddy', but is now within us. IMHO.

 

Hebrews 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:  9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;  10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.  11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;  12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The above quote from Hebrews doesn't answer the following question

 

Where does the Old Testament confirm that the new covenant would replace God's existing Law with a new system human sacrifice? Where does it says in the OT that once you understand the purpose of the law you are exempt from it?

 

The book of Hebrews is one of the biggest ripoff from the OT. It takes so many quotes out context and then tries to validates the NT.

 

Foreshadowing is not a good evidence cause it can mean whatever the believer wants to be. I would like to see proper scriptures from the OT which explicitilty supports your claim

 

Foreshadowing Problem

 

As far as the sacrifice goes, Jesus in no way fulfilled the requirements of the Mosaic law and his sacrifice does not qualify as a valid sin offering to God.

 

Counterfeit Sacrifice

 

Pritish, while I can respect your recognition of the OT, since I do believe in Jesus, I give the NT priority over the OT. The laws of the OT have not been done away with, just given more clarity. Jesus was just emphasizing the meaning and purpose of these laws are what is important! He changed it from 'obedience' to the law, to a 'desire' to fulfill the law. The letter of the law, the strict literal interpretation of these laws kill.  The old way of looking at the law created sin, guilt, condemnation...  Jesus encouraged us to THINK and REASON.

 

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Quoting a verse NT does not prove that NT is valid. This is like quoting a verse from Book of Mormon to prove that the Book of Mormon.

 

So pretty much if you don't "desire" to fulfill the law, you don't have to follow it. It seems that from the above quote you seem to desire to follow Paul, as if he is some sort of valid representative of God. It also shows how you are taking the God of the OT seriously.

 

In the New Convenant, the Law would be followed completely

 

Ezekiel 37:24

'My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees.

 

Ezek 36:27

And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

 

Why should the following declaration from God's word be dismissed in favor of Paul's musings?

 

Psa 111:7-8

The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure.

They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.

 

Why are God's moral absolutes discarded in favor of a new moral code which revolves around faith in a human sacrifice instead of obedience to God's Law?

Why should a person follow Paul instead of God?

 

 

Show me verses from the OT which support your following claim

 

He changed it from 'obedience' to the law, to a 'desire' to fulfill the law[

 

 

As far as following Jesus, here is what Jesus had to say about the law

 

Matt 5:18-20

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

[Amanda]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pritish, excuse me please. It seems that I am having a problem communicating my ideas. I'll try to sum it up, and to be as concise as possible... I don't know what else to do. It seems to me, by your post which I do think is sincere, I'm not getting my point accross. I apologize, it is my best effort though.

 

IMO, no one can study the Bible in its entirity, in the manner it deserves to give it the merit it deserves. Having said that, I have placed emphasis on the NT because my main focus has been on these teachings of Jesus.

 

It is my understanding that the 'spirit' of these laws are what is important, NOT the words on the paper. My understanding of these laws is that all of them are in regards to two laws. 1. Love God (what is sacred, pure, and holy) with all your heart, soul, and mind. 2. Love your neighbor (everyone is your neighbor) as yourself.

 

So it just makes sense to me to live one's life in a manner to respect and appreciate everyone in a humble manner, without being condescending in any way (show meekness, strength under a gentle nature), to help those you can... that need it AND this is just an obviously intelligent premise to base one's nature that rings a truth to me. Does it need any support to prove that it is legitimate to me? No. Does it to you, or other's? I don't know... does it?

[Mythra]

IMO, no one can study the Bible in its entirity, in the manner it deserves to give it the merit it deserves. Having said that, I have placed emphasis on the NT because my main focus has been on these teachings of Jesus.

It is my understanding that the 'spirit' of these laws are what is important, NOT the words on the paper. My understanding of these laws is that all of them are in regards to two laws. 1. Love God (what is sacred, pure, and holy) with all your heart, soul, and mind. 2. Love your neighbor (everyone is your neighbor) as yourself.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hi Amanda.

 

Here are some of the "words" of Jesus that I don't remember you quoting:

 

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill" (Matt 5:7)

 

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" Matt 5:18

 

"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass than for one tittle of the law to fail" Luke 16:17.

 

Doesn't sound to me like Jesus had it reduced down to just two laws.

[daniel_1012]

Whatever hell be... whether fire, whether desolation... or the mere knowledge that you will be absent from the glory of God for all time... Whatever it be, it is a place nobody will the least bit enjoy, and it's reality will be torment enough.

[Fweethawt]

Whatever hell be... whether fire, whether desolation... or the mere knowledge that you will be absent from the glory of God for all time...  Whatever it be, it is a place nobody will the least bit enjoy, and it's reality will be torment enough.

 

Hell is just a word created by the ancient scribes. Just because people took it, ran with it, and kept belief in it going by adding all sorts of weird meanings to it, does no more to validate its reality than say -- this talking frog on my lap.

[Amanda]

Hi Amanda. 

 

Here are some of the "words" of Jesus that I don't remember you quoting:

 

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill" (Matt 5:7)

 

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled"  Matt 5:18

 

"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass than for one tittle of the law to fail"  Luke 16:17.

 

Doesn't sound to me like Jesus had it reduced down to just two laws.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hello Mythra.

 

Please look at the 'spirit' of each law, and discern what is its meaning or purpose. Which particular law is not about (1) keeping a sense of what is 'sacred' (decency), (2) and/or respecting ALL people... including self?

[Amanda]

HELLO Serenity Now!

But Jesus doesn't fit Messianic requirements, he failed and the OT says to disregard false prophets who claim to speak for god.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know you have studied this aspect more than I. It is still my understanding that many had their own perception of the way to interpret the Bible then too. Many expected a legalistic interpretation. Jesus doesn't seem to ba a 'legalistic' kind of person, yet still fulfills the prophecy, IMHO.

How you feel and what the bible says are different.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My dear friend, we all have opinions of its interpretation. That's what makes it such a wonderful topic to debate! BTW, I find nothing wrong with how you are, however you got there.

Love god with all your heart, soul and mind is a law in torah.  Sacred, pure, and holy is defined by the torah Amanda.  You strip the law and there is nothing sacred, pure and holy.  Love is shown to biblegod by OBEDIENCE to HIS laws.

Thats in the torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy) too...although God had no problem ordering genocide of Israelite neighbors.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Serenity Now, I have no intentions of stripping these laws, but to embellish their purpose and meaning! It's changing an obedience to the law to a desire to fulfill the very meaning and purpose of the law. It's like changing the stop at a 'stop sign' because I don't want to get a ticket... to stopping at the 'stop sign' because I want to be safe and make sure no one gets hurt.

 

If I come to a 'stop sign' at an intersection in the middle of the desert, don't see any cars for miles and miles around... so I just cruise through the stop sign. So? Does it matter? I don't think so. I didn't break the purpose and meaning of the law. If another car were approaching, I would stop... that is my responsibility in that situation. Either way, I have kept the meaning and purpose of the law. Of course there can be a very fine line here, and if there is even a question in one's mind... I think it better to opt for a more legalistic choice. IMHO.

The problem is that you are picking and pulling and demolishing jewish beliefs to establish your sweet and kind version.  Amanda, you speak much about respecting the beliefs of others, how can you call doing what you do to the scriptures, that they consider holy, as respectful to the beliefs of the Jews?  If anything, it would be wise for you to find out the "why" on why they do not respect or accept your beliefs. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Serenity Now, I was once married to a Jew for a long time. We are very good friends to this day, and with our mutual friends. Many friends of mine are Jewish, not to mention my youngest son has chosen to allign himself with the Jews too. I honor and respect how they believe, as well as ALL religions. I just happen to believe that Jesus brought a new dispensation of these Jewish laws.

[Mythra]

Hello Mythra.

Please look at the 'spirit' of each law, and discern what is its meaning or purpose. Which particular law is not about (1) keeping a sense of what is 'sacred' (decency), (2) and/or respecting ALL people... including self?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

OK, help me out with this one then.

 

"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard."

Lev. 19:27

 

Two verses later we have do not turn your daughter into a prostitute. Now that one I get. Please explain the spirit of the law concerning haircuts. Why was that important enough to god to make it into his holy writ?

[Mythra]

ps: I don't know if this law would be considered a jot or a tittle. Either way, Jesus backs it.

[Amanda]

OK, help me out with this one then.

 

"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard."

Lev. 19:27

 

Two verses later we have do not turn your daughter into a prostitute.  Now that one I get.  Please explain the spirit of the law concerning haircuts.  Why was that important enough to god to make it into his holy writ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mythra, in researching this a bit... IMHO, it means this:

 

Leviticus 19:27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

 

You should not make yourself look young and foolish, but show the wisdom of your age.

[Mythra]

Mythra, in researching this a bit... IMHO, it means this:

Leviticus 19:27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

You should not make yourself look young and foolish, but show the wisdom of your age.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Holy shit, Amanda. Are you wearing your flip flops today?

 

I quote the New English Translation, and you come back with King James to clarify it? WTF?

 

Ps: It didn't clarify it.

[Mythra]

Mythra, in researching this a bit... IMHO, it means this:

Leviticus 19:27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

You should not make yourself look young and foolish, but show the wisdom of your age.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Amanda - you're kind of a class act here, and you know I like you, but if you keep giving dumb responses like this, you are going back into my totally whacked category.

 

What difference does it make if you say trim your hair or round the corner of your head. Bottom line is - WHY DOES GOD GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THIS? What possible reason is there for this to be a law in God's world? What does this say about this God?

 

What's next? Thy shall not poppeth the zit upon thy noseth. Thus saith the Lord.

[Amanda]

Amanda - you're kind of a class act here, and you know I like you, but if you keep giving dumb responses like this, you are going back into my totally whacked category.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Mythra, I missed your charming style while you were gone! I'm so glad you're back. (I think )

 

Mythra, I used the KJV because at crosswalk.com they have a KJV and lexicon connected program that makes researching it much easier for me. It's not my favorite lexicon for accuracy, but it's the easiest.

 

If you're really interested, research each word back to its prime root meaning, take it in context of the message it is presented, and see what you get. I know that is just what you want to do for a Friday night!

 

Then again, maybe you can make your evening much more exciting and have a sensual companion, who likes pulling each of your toe nails out with pliers instead.

 

[Amanda]

Hmmm...seems Jesus requires obedience and makes a clear separation of those who don't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Serenity Now... you're an amazing person in exceptional integrity. Like I've said, I can tell by your post... I could trust you with anything! I know you ARE like this, and you don't have biblegod or Jesus in your life. You've become an outstanding person as I see you.

 

Let me ask you this. If you think that Jesus was quite legalistic, and required strict obedience to the letter of the law, NOT the 'spirit' of the law... why did he heal a man on the Sabbath, or say it's ok to get your oxen out of the ditch in which he is stuck, on the holy day? Clearly to heal, and get a mired animal out of the ditch, IS work!

[Amanda]

Amanda, if Jesus really did break the Sabbath and really did break YHWH's laws and taught against keeping the letter then he could not be the perfect, sin-free sacrifice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here's where you and I disagree. Just a few minor things in the scope of EVERYTHING. But hey, that's why this is a debate. lol

 

See, I think that keeping the meaning and purpose of the law is all that is important in keeping the law. (Although, be careful if it comes down to any where near the fine line!) This, IMHO, is how Jesus allows an abundant life. It is how all things can be done, in the right perspective in regards to respectful attitudes.

 

Your right, Jesus emphasizes the only thing that can not be done is condemnation.

[Mythra]

Then again, maybe you can make your evening much more exciting and have a sensual companion, who likes pulling each of your toe nails out with pliers instead.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

I needed a good laugh. Way to go, Amanda. That cracked me up.

[SkepticOfBible]

Pritish, excuse me please. It seems that I am having a problem communicating my ideas. I'll try to sum it up, and to be as concise as possible... I don't know what else to do. It seems to me, by your post which I do think is sincere, I'm not getting my point accross. I apologize, it is my best effort though

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

I totally understand your ideas. But you repeated ignore my request to show me evidence to back you claim, and you repeatedly choose to ignore the facts of the OT, which I present to you

 

IMO, no one can study the Bible in its entirity, in the manner it deserves to give it the merit it deserves. Having said that, I have placed emphasis on the NT because my main focus has been on these teachings of Jesus.

 

What there not to study in it's entirity? It's all there in front of you.

 

The reason why I put emphase on the OT because both the NT and you claim that the NT is supported by the OT. However when you study the OT, that is not so. In fact it contracts the OT on so many of it's point.

 

Christians claim that they are forgiven their sins because they are "washed by the precious blood" of Jesus, who was a human sacrifice for the sins of all mankind.

 

Christians claim that's what the "new covenant" is really about. Jesus provided the ultimate vehicle of salvation which replaced the old system and laws that God had previously set up.

 

In other words, God changed his mind about people having to follow his perfect(Psa 19:7) and eternal(Psa 119:152,160) laws and replaced them with a new system of faith in a human sacrifice.

 

In this new improved brand of theology, Jesus was really God, and God sacrificed himself to himself so he could change rules which he set up in the first place.

 

 

It is my understanding that the 'spirit' of these laws are what is important, NOT the words on the paper.

 

As I asked you before does understanding the spirit of the law gives you the license to pick and follow certain laws, while ignoring others? The law is not a cafeteria line where you get to pick which ones you like. This is not supported by anywhere in the bible.

 

My understanding of these laws is that all of them are in regards to two laws. 1. Love God (what is sacred, pure, and holy) with all your heart, soul, and mind. 2. Love your neighbor (everyone is your neighbor) as yourself.

 

To say that all of the 613 laws of the OT come down to two laws is a very big generalisation.

 

As I already stated that loving and following god means to follow all his commandments, not just some that you like or dislike. This I have backed up by showing you various verses from both the NT and the OT.

 

As far as neighbourly love goes I'll let the OT speak for itself

 

 

1 Samuel 15:1

Samuel said to Saul, "I am the one Yahweh sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from Yahweh. 2 This is what Yahweh Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"

 

Leviticus 25:44

'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.

 

Psalms 137:8-9

8 O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction,

happy is he who repays you

for what you have done to us-

9 he who seizes your infants

and dashes them against the rocks.

 

2 Kings 8:12

 

12 "Why is my lord weeping?" asked Hazael.

"Because I know the harm you will do to the Israelites," he answered. "You will set fire to their fortified places, kill their young men with the sword, dash their little children to the ground, and rip open their pregnant women."

 

Hosea 13:16

The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

 

2 Kings 15:16

At that time Menahem, starting out from Tirzah, attacked Tiphsah and everyone in the city and its vicinity, because they refused to open their gates. He sacked Tiphsah and ripped open all the pregnant women.

 

So it just makes sense to me to live one's life in a manner to respect and appreciate everyone in a humble manner, without being condescending in any way (show meekness, strength under a gentle nature), to help those you can... that need it AND this is just an obviously intelligent premise to base one's nature that rings a truth to me. Does it need any support to prove that it is legitimate to me? No. Does it to you, or other's? I don't know... does it?

 

The prophet Isaiah had something to say about those who attempt to dismiss the law.

 

Isa 8:20

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

 

Christians have followed Paul, turned from God, and invented their own theology based on the writings of the apostate Paul.

 

Being one of God's people, as many Christians repeatedly claim they are, requires the hard work of actually following the laws he gave. Christians mock the very God they claim to worship, for they wish to "finish" the law and erect a human sacrifice icon as an excuse to ignore it.

 

Ultimately you proved to me that Bible is what the believer wants it to be and not what it says, but the fact remain that the NT is not all supported by OT

 

The canon of the Bible didn't drop from the sky as one leather bound book. It was voted into place by various councils of male clerics over many years. It was these male clerics that decided which writings were God's word, and these councils didn't take place until hundreds of years after Jesus was dead.

 

Perhaps this is the most amazing fact that I can't understand. The bible is decided by men by vote as to what is holy scripture and what is not. And then on top of that 1500 years later Martin Luther(the father of Nazism) decides that some of the books needs to be thrown out, and so finally we have "corrected" word of god.

 

Then christians come along and say "Christianity is not man made, it is made by god". Well atleast the Muslims have a better story as to how their book into being.

[Amanda]

Hello Pritish.

What there not to study in it's entirity? It's all there in front of you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you study the Bible in a manner that it is superfically presented, without examining how words have evolved from their prime root meanings, comprehending the context a message is presented, cross-referencing throughout the Bible, understanding the 'times' it is delievered, then you will get a superficial meaning and miss many of there gems I think are there.

Christians claim that they are forgiven their sins because they are "washed by the precious blood" of Jesus, who was a human sacrifice for the sins of all mankind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, we are saved by grace. The more the sins, grace abounds even more! We were given a high standard of obedience to live up to in the OT. Jesus, representing 'man', by his 'blood' is related to ALL of us. By the fullness of his Spirit, he related to God in a maturity worthy of God. Man could not totally comply in the 'obedience' to the law the way it was established. Jesus, on the cross, with every sin that could be perpetrated was done to him... and in the worst of it all he said... Father, the head of Spiritual powers, forgive them for they know not what they do. They are doing the best they know how, in their particular situation, with the coping skills available to them, if they would of known any better... they would of done that!!! .... And it is THAT concept which is grace that saved us, IMHO. How can ANYONE be condemned for not doing better than their best?! Obviously that is ALL we can do! Still EVERYONE needs to be held accountable and responsible for their actions, we're not going to 'throw them away' though, IMO.

In this new improved brand of theology, Jesus was really God, and God sacrificed himself to himself so he could change rules which he set up in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No. IMHO, God was all there was in the beginning. His spirit separated himself among mankind in order to have companionship and many different experiences. He, through Jesus is reconciling everything back to unity in God, what is sacred... only being better than before, by the richness of this experience. Hopefully this will be a long, slow process IMO, FWIW.

As far as neighbourly love goes I'll let the OT speak for itself

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pritish, if you're really interested in my interpretations of scriptures such as these, I suggest you go back and read through some of my previous posts, where I have addressed such matters. As I've said, NO ONE has time to devote the time in a manner it deserves, to know it in its entirity. It would take me all day, if not days to research so much material you've presented! Sorry.

 

Some of the OT I have researched: in the beginning of Genesis, Cain and Able, the Temple of Babylon, hmmm.... a few others, but do any of those have an interest for you?

[Amanda]

Hi Serenity Now!

 

Amanda, I'm sorry.  But basically, to me your saying that a people (the Jews) who have had this religion for thousands of years and still believe wholeheartedly in it, have got it all wrong.  The people that wrote Genesis-Malachi, screwed up and didn't know the "true" meaning of the words that they wrote in their own language?  They didn't know what their own language meant?  That is preposterous! It makes absolutely Zero sense to me.  They wrote it, in their time, with their language and your saying that the words they wrote down are wrong.  The Jews are the root of the Genesis-Malachi. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On the contrary! I think that these Jews knew exactly what they were writing and what they meant! I don't necessarily agree with the present translations of their masterpieces though. I'm not going to take King James' spin on things without further investigation. I'm not goint to take their message and put it in present day context. I'm going to recognize that in those days they were not as articualate as us, and consider a larger ramification of considerations as to how they presented a position, as to give me the most possibilities to gain the best insight as to exactly what they meant. If anyone likes King James' spin, and it rings true to them at a topical level... I have no problem with that... for them.

I like you and consider you an online friend, but I strongly am against your methods of interpretation. -------- Have you studied what the Jewish Language means Hebrew wise?  If not, I think it'd be wise for you to do so.  You cannot come up with true Hebrew interpretations without knowing Hebrew.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Serenity Now, I like you! I see the state of your heart and what you believe... no matter what you think about the Bible. Actually, how I've seen how you interpret the Bible is revealing what a tender heart you have to treating people kindly and your indignation to injustice, along with your passion to integrity. I truly appreciate all that. THAT is what is important to me! The message it means to the person.

 

The Hebrew language is of utmost importance to me in researching their writings. I also understand all languages evolve with time. That is why I choose to use a Bible program with lexicon coordinated capabilities. True, it is not the most accurate lexicon available, IMO. I do have others, and if I so deem it important enough to investigate it more thoroghly... I do use other ones I have, along with encyclopedias referring to those times. I use to do it ALL manually, years full of days with many hours doing it that way... now I have a tendency to be more lazy and use convenient online programs.

I'll quit now and I hope that there are no hard feelings.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Serenity Now, be passionately against my resources to my beliefs and reject them all you want. That does not bother me. If you were to be upset and reject me personally, as I don't feel I've ever done anything disrespectful to you... not intentionally, because I do like and respect you, then that would cause hard feelings for me.

[Panther]

Not till ya pay the royalties, sweetie.  I accept Paypal and all major credit cards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

We are not worthy, Mythra!! Puleeeze, spare us all!

 

[Panther]

Amanda,

I used to be so like you. I used to focus on "just jesus" and the (what I thought) were the two main laws that were important that he came with....

The treat others how you would like to be treated and love thy neighbor.

 

There are many kinds of christians out there. I believe this....there are the kind that focus on the wrath of god and the kind that focus on the love.

 

The problem is, we can't just be one or the other. When you hold the title christian, you MUST read and follow ALL.

Once I studied the OT more thoroughly and realized that God was "nothing" like I thought he was, the whole stack of cards came crashing down.

 

I understand Amanda, that in your own way, you are just striving to be the best person you can be and I can certainly see that you love and respect others.

I admire that....and I can relate to that as that was is how I live as well....only now I live that way as an "ex c" because frankly, biblegod is not really at all what I thought he was in prior years.

 

Please do me a favor Amanda, read the OT and the parts that don't make sense. Read them openly, as if you were just observing it instead of trying to make sense of it.

 

In my humble opinion, you are more not christian than christian.....and that is good.

I don't believe you will be calling yourself a christian either in due time.......I don't believe your principles will change, but I do sense your beliefs will. Perhaps I am wrong, but I do believe you are intelligent and I do believe that one day you will discern this whole OT thing......

The good principles of jesus ARE good....but the problem is, there is SOOO much more to it.....

Have a good day, kay!!

[Amanda]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Panther!

 

That was an extremely kind and wonderful post.

 

It has left me speechless... and as you know, that is a rare occurrence for me!

 

You all are such wonderful people here. I really appreciate how you guys tolerate me!