Blasphemy

[Seethat]

Now there truly are problems with this translation. The word "Lord" occurs only once in the accepted Greek text, but is written twice in the KJV. (I coloured them red.) Take a look at the NRSV -

He asked, "Who are you, Lord?" The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.- Acts 9:5 NRSV

Now when one understands that the Greek word κύριος is the same thing as the English word "Sir," one then reads -

He asked, "Who are you, Sir?" The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting."- Acts 9:5

Paul was met by an angel of light that called itself Jesus. Paul was out doing the devil's work, and the devil had reason to interrupt him and blind him.

It doesn't just mean sir so you back up the point you don't know Greek, but that's irrelevant.... You are calling who Scripture says is Jesus is the devil.... so you back up the point of this thread

 

[Rhema]

It doesn't just mean sir so you back up the point you don't know Greek,

You're starting to make me doubt the competence of the educational system in New Zealand.

You accused me of putting words in your mouth, but then turn around and do the same? (That's rich ... even hypocritical.)
So why do you need to put words in my mouth? I never said κύριος JUST means sir. I am saying that κύριος doesn't mean Jesus in this context.

He asked, "Who are you, KURIOS?" The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting."​

- Acts 9:5 NRSV

I provide you with a LINK to the Liddell Scott Greek Lexicon for the word KURIOS (G2962)
And since the noun is a substantive -

B. head of a family, master of a house​

In 1611 the word Lord was a title of the nobility, and "Sir" was a titled designation of honor as conferred by the crown. Even today.

You don't need to be ashamed of your lack of education, you just need to be honest and humble about it. And you don't have to pull others down by insulting their education just to make yourself feel better.

You are calling who Scripture says is Jesus is the devil....

No. I'm not. See there? Your English teacher owes you an apology.

I am saying that the angel of light who called itself Jesus ISN'T Jesus. Scripture doesn't say the angel of light IS Jesus. You're in a deep load of crap if you believe anyone calling themselves Jesus IS actually Jesus.

And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.​

- Matthew 24:4-5 KJV

Jesus heals the blind, the devil blinds people. (This is simple math.)

Paul encountered this "Jesus" in the desert.

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.​

- Matthew 24:24-26 KJV

(These are Jesus' words that you're rejecting. Just as you've rejected the Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus preached, replacing it with the Gospel that Paul preached.)

And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.​

- Matthew 24:11-14 KJV

The Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus preached is that which saves you. You even admit that Paul preaches a different Gospel than that which Jesus taught. So you have rejected the Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus Himself says shall be preached unto all nations until the end.

A disciple of Jesus does not follow a Gospel that is different than which Jesus preached. That's why I say that you deny Jesus before men. You deny the Gospel of the Kingdom that the Son of God Himself said will be preached until the end of the world.

I know who Jesus is. I know which scriptures preach the Gospel that Jesus preached.

And blasphemy is preaching a Gospel that is different from what the Son of God, Jesus the Christ, preached.

Pure and simple.

I pray that the Lord of all creation not give your soul peace until you truly understand that you have rejected the Gospel teachings of Jesus, and that you are finally blessed with peace when you repent and embrace the Gospel of the Kingdom.

Blessings upon you,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Because he was talking to the Jews. Who understood that a sacrifice is not bloodless, and that it is in the blood that you have redemption.

Jews who understood wrongly.... That was the whole point of why the Father had to send a Messiah - because Judaism (whichever flavor) was wrong.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV
(Be sure to read the entire chapter)

I guess one could read Leviticus to get that understanding...

How can you say, "We are wise, and the TORAH (which includes Leviticus) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV
(Be sure to read the entire chapter)

Which parts were made into a lie? See previous verse.

When Paul said through this man JESUS...

Let it be known to you therefore, my brothers, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you;​

- Acts 13:38 NRSV

He actually meant "this man" (Jesus) - not Moses, not Abraham, Not the Levites.

Since the WAY to obtain the forgiveness of sin was proclaimed to you by JESUS, then, one would think it obvious to go find out what Jesus said about how to obtain the forgiveness of sin.

There was nothing in the sermon of Paul in Acts 13 about blood payment for sin.
There was nothing in the sermon of Peter in Acts 2 about blood payment for sin.
There was nothing in the Teachings of Jesus about blood payment for sin.
Nothing in the Sermon on the Mount. (Instead, the Father forgives sin.)
Nothing in the Sermon on the Plain. (Instead, the Father forgives sin.)

And YES, I am well aware of the teaching that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.

But John the Baptist taught a remission of sin without the shedding of blood.

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.​

- Mark 1:4 KJV

John preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sin, not the blood sacrifice of animals. John never set up any alters in Galilee to have animals sacrificed, nor was there any indication that after the baptism of repentance one had to go back to the temple and offer anything.

Do I need to post the scripture that Jesus preached the same good news as John with regards to the baptism of repentance for the remission (same word as forgiveness) of sins?

And all here should know that Jesus Stopped DEAD all the sacrifices in the Temple, including the grain sacrifices. The temple wasn't ever for sacrifices, but was to be a house of prayer for all nations.

For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.​

- Psalms 51:16-17 KJV

(The sacrifice of a broken spirit and contrite heart don't need blood, Nick.)

Stand in awe, and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah. Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust in the LORD.​

- Psalms 4:4-5 KJV

Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the Most High.​

- Psalms 50:13-14 NRSV

(The sacrifice of thanksgiving doesn't need blood, Nick.)

All these things my hand has made, and so all these things are mine, says the LORD. But this is the one to whom I will look, to the humble and contrite in spirit, who trembles at my word. Whoever slaughters an ox is like one who kills a human being; whoever sacrifices a lamb, like one who breaks a dog's neck; whoever presents a grain offering, like one who offers swine's blood; whoever makes a memorial offering of frankincense, like one who blesses an idol. These have chosen their own ways, and in their abominations they take delight; I also will choose to mock them, and bring upon them what they fear; because, when I called, no one answered, when I spoke, they did not listen; but they did what was evil in my sight, and chose what did not please me. ​

- Isaiah 66:2-4 NRSV

There is no record at all of Jesus ever bringing any animal sacrifice to the Temple.
Did I miss something? Maybe. Let me know.

There is no record at all of the Twelve ever bringing any animal sacrifice to the Temple.
Did I miss something? Maybe. Let me know.

NOW TO BE CLEAR....

First, I realize how radical and unsettling this post might be. But the purpose of my post was to show that from the time of John even up to the sermon of Paul in Acts13, there was no mention at all of Jesus being any blood sacrifice to pay for sin.

In Acts 13, Paul mentioned not one word of Jesus being the blood sacrifice to pay for sins. (THAT'S MY POINT.)

Did Paul start to preach that Jesus was a blood payment later on? It would seem so. I have my suspicions why, but that's besides the point.

FINALLY,
I understand that my post here flows a bit outside the boundaries of the OP.
So I WILL NOT REPLY in this thread to any replies.
Instead, there is already a thread called Blasphemy where I am taken to task and comments may be posted.

Here is a LINK to the thread where I have posted some additional comments that expand on the topic.

And NO, this is not an admission that my views are blasphemy, although most of y'all might believe that (and I understand why). It is, though, a more comprehensive statement and rationale of what I believe that anything I've posted before.

Please realize that I AM OPEN to being shown where I might be in error with what I've stated.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Seethat]

Pass? You want me to fight your disagreements for you? What did I tell you in my response? "I agree with what you are saying." I'm sorry I can't be the referee you want me to be in every single thread that is created so when what you believe is true, even though in this I agree with you, but that in all instances you are right and everyone else is wrong? Should I play the inquisitor?

Is that what you think you are doing? You have it backwards, never met you, you came in.
"Go to your corners and take a breath. I do not want to, but if it becomes necessary, I will lock you both out from replying to this thread."

I would rather you took your own advice and let me write what I want. I never asked for your help or for you to start this thread. I'd rather you left me alone and let me respond how I want. If not, deal with it, but this thread is what you set up, so here we are.

However, there is wide latitude given between what each chooses to believe and what is posted. The Word of God, defends itself, and has since its inspired writings were done.

Well... there is a duty to contend for the faith, if you are in the faith....Jude 3, and watching for people that deny our Lord, and calling Jesus a devil is way crossing that line.

What church might that be? And how do you know what my job is?

The real Church is the body of Christ; there are many members.

I guess your job, as you state it, is looking over shoulders? is what caused this situation, as you put it -

"After all I am a Moderator, and will be looking over your shoulder here to watch how you communicate to others. Do not consider yourself special/persecuted in this, because I do it to all. For that is what I have been tasked to do." lol....

If I wanted to stop you, I could easily have done so. I did not.

Exactly, because you are the mod, look what you try to stop and look what you allow. It's on you, but you started this thread, which helped me prove my points, so that did help.

I have not defined blasphemy at all. So, your accusation is baseless and unwarranted. In the name of Love? God is Love! Read 1 Corinthians 13, or what some call the Love Chapter. Take it to heart and it will do you well.

I asked you to define it, and you wouldn't. I showed you the dictionary and checked if you agreed with that definition, you didn't answer, and I proved they are doing it. So if you are not trying to redefine it there was no need for this thread.

As to read 1 Corinthians and take it to heart..... your accusation is baseless because I have already multiple times and take it to heart. See how that works, are you ready to define your version of blasphemy yet then? The person calling Jesus the devil isn't enough for you? cos apparently I'm told we can't really believe Scripture because man might have altered it ....I've only seen this level of blasphemy from Kaballah adherents or Muslims that would say Paul met the devil and not Jesus on Damascus Road. It's outrageous! But as you explained, this site is for the "What church", that would make sense.

Saying it doesn't make it so. Prove your accusation that my goal is as you have said!

Sure here

Because what you fail to see, and what I try to consider is that we do not have the original autographs, and so what is considered canon is also disputed by many churches/peoples. Also, the language was not English, and words do not translate precisely as one would want.

Scripture interprets Scripture, you either believe it or you don't, and there is don't get confused by the simplicity that is in Christ. But you should never try and bring doubt on scripture or bring it into dispute by saying we don't have the originals. This topic is as clear as black and white, yes or a no, it's not things we can pretend we cannot understand because we don't have the original autographs like men are in control of it.

Psalm 12:6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

[Seethat]

You're starting to make me doubt the competence of the educational system in New Zealand.

You don't need to be ashamed of your lack of education, you just need to be honest and humble about it. And you don't have to pull others down by insulting their education just to make yourself feel better.

Says the one whose Greek is so up the creek it has you telling us that while Saul was killing the disciples of Christ, Paul was persecuting Satan? For the voice asked him, “why are you persecuting me".... is the level of your intelligence? But my points do hit your emotions so much that it makes you so uptight that you have to make things up and accuse.

You're in a deep load of crap if you believe anyone calling themselves Jesus IS actually Jesus.

It is not anyone, it is Scripture that is given by inspiration of God, you just do not believe it.

Jesus heals the blind, the devil blinds people. (This is simple math.)

So by your standard, you would be calling the angels in Genesis 19 Devils for blinding perverts so they couldn't have their way, creepy logic.

Just as you've rejected the Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus preached.

No, The Gospel means Good News. I say believe everything that Jesus said about his kingdom as Jesus kingdom endures forever. I say you must be born again and The Kingdom of God is within you. It's something you know nothing about because it hasn't happened to you, as you admit you haven't received Jesus, so that means you wouldn't be a child of God, you would still be a child of the devil, rebrobate....that's just facts of how the bible describes it.

You even admit that Paul preaches a different Gospel than that which Jesus taught.

No I haven't, and you cannot quote me saying that. You just turn into an accuser when you don't get your way. I say Paul taught about Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection, after Jesus had ascended to heaven, as it was after Jesus had died on the cross. It's hard to teach about it before it's happened Your problem is you ignore everything after the cross because you cannot get past it or understand it as you don't think Jesus died for our sins

Mathew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Paul teaches about Jesus; he doesn't deny any aspect of Jesus, he teaches Jesus is the only way to heaven, Jesus is the Gospel, He is the Good News. What makes you uptight is when I talk about the Gospel of the Grace of God, you do not understand the Gospel of the Grace of God, but you cannot talk about something you don't understand, so it's expected, so it makes you uptight because you do not understand Gods grace or salvation, by Grace are you saved through faith not of works and Jesus died for our sins and things like that

A disciple of Jesus does not follow a Gospel that is different than which Jesus preached. That's why I say that you deny Jesus before men. You deny the Gospel of the Kingdom that the Son of God Himself said will be preached until the end of the world.

You should listen to every word that Jesus says, the Gospel is Good News, and I say you must be born again, or you will not see the kingdom of God. all the good news Jesus said about his kingdom applies to his kingdom. So that just leaves you with your accusations. It's the devil who accuses to God day and night....do you see yourself?

I know who Jesus is. I know which scriptures preach the Gospel that Jesus preached.

You are saying Jesus is the Devil, and you admit you haven't received Jesus, so that makes you rebrobate and not a child of God, still a child of the devil....it's biblical facts, but you do not believe the bible, so look at your actions and that should show you

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

And there is also the fact the Church is to consider you cursed because you reject the Gospel for the church.

 

[Seethat]

Now when one understands that the Greek word κύριος is the same thing as the English word "Sir," one then reads -

He asked, "Who are you, Sir?" The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting."- Acts 9:5

Paul was met by an angel of light that called itself Jesus. Paul was out doing the devil's work, and the devil had reason to interrupt him and blind him.

It doesn't just mean sir so you back up the point you don't know Greek, but that's irrelevant.... You are calling who Scripture says is Jesus is the devil.... so you back up the point of this thread

 

[Christ4Ever]

Because he was talking to the Jews. Who understood that a sacrifice is not bloodless, and that it is in the blood that you have redemption.

Jews who understood wrongly.... That was the whole point of why the Father had to send a Messiah - because Judaism (whichever flavor) was wrong.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV
(Be sure to read the entire chapter)

Again, read Leviticus, and you will see that he did not speak to them, but to Moses. Unless you think Moses lied about it. Shrug, can't help you there, but evidently the Jews did continue to sacrifice and understood the sacrificial system whether required of them or not, as did Paul, who made it as I said unnecessary to explain it to them...power in the blood! \o/

I guess one could read Leviticus to get that understanding...

How can you say, "We are wise, and the TORAH (which includes Leviticus) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV
(Be sure to read the entire chapter)

Now you are frustrating and need to find another site. You have stated previously that the OT has been distorted, and so unreliable because of the scribes. If that is so, then if it is all unreliable, then even your reasoning is flawed because it will always be based upon distorted writings, that you can't confirm as being true. Oh, I love you brother, but don't come back when you leave. When text, context, and greater context is irrelevant to you to consider/use, and then when your eyes/self-reasoning says is true, can only be true then you are lost to have any discussion with anyone not you or possibly Leumas. You might want to contact Leumas and do your own site.

First, I realize how radical and unsettling this post might be. But the purpose of my post was to show that from the time of John even up to the sermon of Paul in Acts13, there was no mention at all of Jesus being any blood sacrifice to pay for sin.

In Acts 13, Paul mentioned not one word of Jesus being the blood sacrifice to pay for sins. (THAT'S MY POINT.)

Jesus did not have to for He was without sin. If He had then you'd be arguing that He couldn't be without sin, and thus the perfect sacrifice because He had done sin offerings at the temple!
It also necessary that He die as a sacrifice or know it now that you are still in your sin because you have no covenant blood being shed. But according to the Abrahamic Covenant and what is recorded is doubtful, since the scribes....

His words at Passover, should be enough to show you, but I doubt it.

At that particular time, I will state again Paul did not have to because it was understood by the audience, but he did in other places to different audiences. (THAT'S MY POINT).

and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. Colossians 1:20 NIV

Please realize that I AM OPEN to being shown where I might be in error

ROFL - you may really think you are "OPEN", but from what I have seen, the instances that you have acknowledged you were wrong I could count on 1 hand, with 3 fingers missing, and one was not even for what was being said but in regard to some irrelevant comment you had made. I thought at the time you must be grinding your teeth in typing it, and why it didn't seem to fit to what was being said in the thread or post you were replying to.

I'll post this and then move it over to the Blasphemy thread along with your reply, so that it will satisfy your not disturbing this thread comment. Though instead I just might make a copy of both, so that others can see both replies and look to the other thread if they want to follow our back and forth. So, no need to reply to this one here, but if you want you can reply to the copied one at the thread called Blasphemy. Adios.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Rhema]

... calling Jesus a devil is way crossing that line.

Never said that. Those are YOUR words.

I said that the angel of light calling itself Jesus was a devil, and posted scripture where Jesus warned about people (and one would think spirits) using his name.

You think that angel of light was telling the truth.
I don't.
Why?
Jesus healed the blind.
Your Jesus blinds people.

I find that troubling.
(And the fact that you continue to misrepresent my position and my words.)

You want me cursed, I want you blessed.

Blessings,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

I'm told we can't really believe Scripture because man might have altered it ...

Scripture says that.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

Archeology also says that:

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bibl…

For almost 1,500 years, the New Testament manuscripts w…

www.goodreads.com

But that doesn't meant we can't believe it.
It means that we should take great care as to WHAT we believe.

From what I've read of your posts, you believe the teachings of Jesus are completely irrelevant to your salvation.
I am wrong? Let me know.

Thanks,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

The person calling Jesus the devil isn't enough for you?

Since it would seem that you have great reading difficulties, let me once again repeat.

Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.

(That's not enough for you?)

Be blessed,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Scripture interprets Scripture,

Where in scripture does it say this?

It's an honest and serious question. I keep seeing people repeat this over and over, but no one can ever find any corresponding verse, so... that would be known as eisegesis, bringing a concept outside the Bible and applying to the Bible.

Not very wise, one would think.

Blessings,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Says the one whose Greek is so up the creek it has you telling us that while Saul was killing the disciples of Christ, Paul was persecuting Satan? For the voice asked him, “why are you persecuting me"....

Of course the VOICE would say that, if it was pretending to be Jesus.
Duh...

In trying to destroy the church, the devil realized that killing off one believer at a time was never going to work. So the devil took a different tactic. Put Paul on the inside, and then have Paul CHANGE THE GOSPEL MESSAGE that God had His Son preach.

Worked... didn't it.

But my points do hit your emotions so much that it makes you so uptight that you have to make things up and accuse.

Actually, this is pure projection. My emotions are fine, you on the other hand are a very angry person. (It shows.) And I rather feel sorry for you, since you seem unable to have a civil conversation.

It is not anyone, it is Scripture that is given by inspiration of God, you just do not believe it.

Scripture does not say that the VOICE talking to Paul was Jesus. It says that the voice called itself Jesus.

I believe that the book of Acts was indeed given by inspiration, but that it gave historical accounts, not theological doctrines. I also believe that you seem unable to read what is actually written. And that's a real shame.

It would have been VERY easy for the author of Acts to actually write that the VOICE WAS Jesus. But he didn't write that.

And I understand why you're angry. It calls your understanding into question. (Rightly so.) But Not all that is in your Bible was written under inspiration. You're also angry because you know you don't have enough education to disprove my position. That's why you have to belittle my education and understanding of Greek. I'm sorry that you haven't had the opportunity or the IQ to study the Bible in its original language, and to study the origins of how the Bible came to be.

I also doubt that you studied Pagan religions, the practice of Roman pagans to be washed in blood and offer up blood sacrifices to their god. Nor have you spent much time studying the History of Christianity. Your faith didn't exist before 1517, and so I think you're rather clueless just how much pagan ritual crept into the Early Orthodox Church influencing some of the epistles that were canonized (by that same Early Orthodox Church).

Am I wrong? (Just be honest and let me know.)

No, The Gospel means Good News. I say believe everything that Jesus said about his kingdom as Jesus kingdom endures forever. I say you must be born again and The Kingdom of God is within you.

Well you've said "believe everything" but do you DO it?

And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:​

- Luke 6:46-47 KJV

Did you notice that you left that part out?

I agree that one must be born again (technically born from the beginning). So... TELL ME.

How did JESUS say that one is to be born again?
(And quote from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John.)

You say this is simple, so you ought to be able to simply use Jesus words to explain this.
(Again... Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John.)

So by your standard, you would be calling the angels in Genesis 19 Devils for blinding perverts so they couldn't have their way, creepy logic.

I almost missed this.... are you saying that Jesus is an angel?

But the men in Sodom were not physically blinded. Try and think it through. If all of a sudden you were BLIND-blind, it would be insane to keep trying to find the door.

And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.​

- Genesis 19:11 KJV

You'd be on the ground screaming out for help terrified. All of them would be. Instead, the men were afflicted with the inability to SEE THE DOOR. (Check the link and scroll down, and yes, I'm using the LXX.)

You really need to think through these things.
(And your English translations don't seem to help.)

as you admit you haven't received Jesus,

That's not what you asked. You said IN YOUR BODY. And then refused to explain what you meant by that.

How did YOU "receive Jesus IN YOUR BODY"?

Sounds like a cult.

You even admit that Paul preaches a different Gospel than that which Jesus taught.

No I haven't, and you cannot quote me saying that.

Actually, I can. Give me a second.....

Jesus is the Good news, the Gospel to be saved in the time of the Gentiles is that Jesus died for our sins rose from the grave and ascended to heaven Paul taught the other disciples about this {gospel} as Jesus hadn't died when the twelve were following him on earth {and I fixed your spelling.}

By your very own words, you said that Paul taught the other disciples about a different Gospel than the one Jesus taught them.

If it was the same Gospel, then Paul wouldn't have had to teach them anything.

Truly, what the heck is wrong with you? (I express loving concern.)
How can anyone have a sane discussion with you if you can't even remember what you write?
(Maybe you're just a devil trying to waste my time ??? That happens a lot.)

I say Paul taught about Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection, after Jesus had ascended to heaven, as it was after Jesus had died on the cross.

Jesus spent 40 days AFTER his death, burial, and resurrection, teaching His disciples; bringing to their remembrance the Gospel message that He (Jesus) taught. And Jesus said absolutely nothing about the Gospel you say Paul is preaching.

I've actually given you TWO examples where Peter and Paul preached the exact same Gospel that Jesus did. (Right here - )

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.​

- Acts 2:38 KJV

Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:​

- Acts 13:38 KJV

Please be honest with everybody and just admit you reject THIS Gospel. At least be honest with yourself.

In the first book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus did and taught from the beginning until the day when he was taken up to heaven after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. After his suffering he presented himself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.​

- Acts 1:1-3 NRSV

If any of this was different from what Jesus preached before his death, why is there absolutely NO record of it in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, all of which were written AFTER the ascension?

It's hard to teach about it before it's happened...

And yet, Jesus taught his chosen apostles about it AFTER it had happened.

In the first book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus did and taught from the beginning until the day when he was taken up to heaven after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. After his suffering he presented himself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.​

- Acts 1:1-3 NRSV

I am gobsmacked that you can't wrap your head around this.

READ THE SCRIPTURE VERSES.

Your problem is you ignore everything after the cross because you cannot get past it or understand it as you don't think Jesus died for our sins

If I may... your problem is that you either cannot read, or have problems with time.

Sigh.... Jesus spent FORTY DAYS after the cross reminding his chosen Apostles what He taught. Peter's sermon in Acts 2 is AFTER the cross. Paul's sermon in Acts 13 is AFTER the cross. So why do you LIE (and you are lying) when hurling the accusation that I ignore everything after the cross? Acts 2:38 is after the cross, and I am an Acts 2:38 Christian.

Peter testified why Jesus died. Paul said something else. Paul proclaimed a different gospel than that which Jesus and Peter did.

Mathew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Seethat....

What's the "this"?

(There are other problems with your translation, but my question is translation independent.)

What's the "this"?

Settle down. Take some time. Pray and think about it.

What's the "this"?


At this point until you understand what the THIS is, any further comments I might have on your posts would be a waste of time.

So what's the "this"?

the Church is to consider you cursed because you reject the Gospel for the church.

Paul wants you to curse me. Yet Jesus calls me blessed. And commands me to bless you.

I BLESS YOU,
Rhema

(What's the "this"?)

 

[Seethat]

You want me cursed, I want you blessed.

No im telling you the truth, the scripture tells me to consider you cursed, because you reject the Gospel that was given to the church in the time of the gentiles so you are galatians 1:8. how many times have we been through this, If I want you cursed why would I tell you what can release you from the curse, but you don't believe Scripture as you continue to prove. Your down to maybe 3 books you havent said are lies, why don't you just admit you don't believe the bible?

Scripture says that.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

Archeology also says that:

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bibl…

For almost 1,500 years, the New Testament manuscripts w…

www.goodreads.com

But that doesn't meant we can't believe it.
It means that we should take great care as to WHAT we believe.

Lol I have only heard muslims argue this...are you a Muslim? , the verse is talking about how the scribes interpret the law and apply it to the people you couldn't read the next verse to get context? and aply it to yourself muslims never read the next verse

Jeremiah 8:9 The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord; and what wisdom is in them?

You really can't see the context? and you always mock about Iq and how smart you think you are when you don't understand Greek and reject most of all the bible? I would argue all).... Have you read the quran and do you believe what the quran says?

From what I've read of your posts, you believe the teachings of Jesus are completely irrelevant to your salvation.
I am wrong? Let me know.

I have told you many times that Jesus is the saviour, and only he can save and he is the only way to heaven and I've shown you the Gospel that saves you just ignore it and reject the bible and deny that Jesus died for our sins and pretty much everything that it means to be a Christian

Since it would seem that you have great reading difficulties, let me once again repeat.

Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.

Who do you say islams muhammad is?

Where in scripture does it say this?

It is a quote from the reformers I have heard, but it is pretty common sense and the concept applies you can find many verses, but you don't believe the bible so.....but here is an example

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

 

[Rhema]

Again, read Leviticus, and you will see that he did not speak to them, but to Moses.

Moses wasn't an ancestor? (C'mon, Nick.)

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this command I gave them, "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; and walk only in the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you." Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but, in the stubbornness of their evil will, they walked in their own counsels, and looked backward rather than forward.​

- Jeremiah 7:22-24 NRSV

The commands were given to all the people in Exodus 20. ALL of them heard his voice.

And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.​

- Exodus 20:19 KJV

They looked backward rather than forward.

Unless you think Moses lied about it.

No. I believe what Jeremiah said.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

You didn't take the time to read the entire chapter, pause and reflect and pray, did you.

Shrug, can't help you there, but evidently the Jews did continue to sacrifice and understood the sacrificial system whether required of them or not,

Yes, they did continue... but it was not a thing that GOD commanded.

From the day that your ancestors came out of the land of Egypt until this day, I have persistently sent all my servants the prophets to them, day after day; yet they did not listen to me, or pay attention, but they stiffened their necks. They did worse than their ancestors did.​

- Jeremiah 7:25-26 NRSV

That's why God had to send his Son, the Messiah, the Christ to teach the Gospel of the baptism of repentance, not the offering of animals.

Now you are frustrating and need to find another site.

Do you mean that I am frustrating YOU? (I think you forgot a word.)

But why do I need to find another site when the only thing I have done is quote the prophet Jeremiah?

Do you believe that the prophet Jeremiah was wrong?

You've done nothing to show me any other understanding of the actual scripture than something like, "well the Jews kept doing it so it must be right."

And yet John the Baptist taught otherwise, and Jesus Himself taught otherwise to the point of shutting down ALL of the sacrifices.

So no. The Jews were wrong.

This is why the KILLED HIM. They Killed Jesus because he taught a forgiveness of sin that had nothing to do with animal (or any) blood sacrifice.

If not, then you ought to be able to show me Jesus' words without needing to kill me (my voice) here.

Just show me.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this command I gave them, "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; and walk only in the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you." Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but, in the stubbornness of their evil will, they walked in their own counsels, and looked backward rather than forward.​

- Jeremiah 7:22-24 NRSV

What does this mean, if it doesn't mean what it says?

You have stated previously that the OT has been distorted, and so unreliable because of the scribes.

(Sigh..) No I didn't. Jeremiah did.

Even the stork in the heavens knows its times; and the turtledove, swallow, and crane observe the time of their coming; but my people do not know the ordinance of the LORD. How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie? The wise shall be put to shame, they shall be dismayed and taken; since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what wisdom is in them?​

- Jeremiah 8:7-9 NRSV

What does this mean, if it doesn't mean what it says?

His words at Passover, should be enough to show you, but I doubt it.

I know the words of Jesus at Passover. (And I'll forgo quoting the actual Greek)

Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured-out into many for the forgiveness of sins.​

- Matthew 26:27-28 NRSV~

So tell me, Nick, what is the "this"?

It's not a hard question, and if you answer me honestly and without guile, hopefully we can continue the conversation.

If you understand the words of Jesus at Passover, then it shouldn't be hard to answer the question, what is the "this"?

I'm sorry you're getting frustrated, but it's like pulling teeth trying to get a rational answer out of Christians.

Oh, I love you brother,

Not if you kill my voice, and refuse to answer. Don't kid yourself.

True blessings in Christ,
Rhema

So, no need to reply to this one here,

(This is the first time I'm seeing your post.)

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.​

- Mark 1:14-15 KJV

If Jesus came preaching the Gospel, then the Gospel is what Jesus preached, and all others are pretenders if they preach something different. Don't say Jesus didn't warn you.

 

[Seethat]

Of course the VOICE would say that, if it was pretending to be Jesus.
Duh...

In trying to destroy the church, the devil realized that killing off one believer at a time was never going to work. So the devil took a different tactic. Put Paul on the inside, and then have Paul CHANGE THE GOSPEL MESSAGE that God had His Son preach.

Worked... didn't it.

It doesn't say pretended, It says it was Jesus, Your theory goes out the window because you said God stepped in after, so you would have to accept

Acts :15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.

But I know your argument is the bible lied after that....but You know some Greek

Scripture does not say that the VOICE talking to Paul was Jesus. It says that the voice called itself Jesus.

Lol it says "I am Jesus whom thou persecutest." no I am pretending to be Jesus lol

Acts 9 :5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

Muslims try and say Jesus was a devil in this instance, the bible does not

You're also angry because you know you don't have enough education to disprove my position. That's why you have to belittle my education and understanding of Greek. I'm sorry that you haven't had the opportunity or the IQ to study the Bible

I do, it is more your argument is Scripture is wrong...Scripture lies, and you know Greek when you don't know Greek, that's the level of your IQ

I also doubt that you studied Pagan religions, the practice of Roman pagans

Yes I know a bit,from what you teach you are a mixture of Kabalist, Catholic and Muslim, Im narrowing it down but its a big mess, but you don't pass any criteria for being a Christian

Well you've said "believe everything" but do you DO it?

I say Jesus Is the Good news and the Saviour... and you ask do I do it? Is that a muslim type question?

Well you've said "believe everything" but do you DO it?

And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:- Luke 6:46-47 KJV

Did you notice that you left that part out?

You have to start with believing in Jesus not calling him a devil and rejecting the word of God

How did JESUS say that one is to be born again?

Through God, You believe what he said and you do it, It is easy as believing in the one that he sent, He needs to give you the new birth before you can become a child of God, as opposed to....You call him a devil and his word a lie

How did JESUS say that one is to be born again?
(And quote from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John.)

You say this is simple, so you ought to be able to simply use Jesus words to explain this.

You can read about it in John 3 it's very clear but oh yea you don't believe the bible...

I almost missed this.... are you saying that Jesus is an angel?

And you talk about IQ.....How do you twist that, I have told you many times Jesus is God never have I said an angel, You are calling who the Bible says is Jesus is the Devil

By your very own words, you said that Paul taught the other disciples about a different Gospel than the one Jesus taught them.

If it was the same Gospel, then Paul wouldn't have had to teach them anything.

Truly, what the heck is wrong with you? (I express loving concern.)
How can anyone have a sane discussion with you if you can't even remember what you write?
(Maybe you're just a devil trying to waste my time ??? That happens a lot.)

Taught them about the Gospel, You have reading comprehension but I guess as you say you don't believe the bible....it was many years after Jesus that Peter still didn't know that the Gentiles could receive the promise, And you think nothing changed with the cross because you admit you don't believe Jesus died for our sins

(Maybe devil trying to waste my time ??? That happens a lot.)

A devil for wasting your time lol you talk about education and IQ a lot but that is just insane who do you think you are...waste your time you write pages and pages on a point I wasn't even talking to you about, you are the one that wont shut up, All the while you call the Bible, God, Jesus, Paul, Peter, John, the old testament prohpet liars while calling Jesus a Devil, you obviously have the devil problem, But wasting time is all you do including your failed greek study

Jesus spent 40 days AFTER his death, burial, and resurrection, teaching His disciples; bringing to their remembrance the Gospel message that He (Jesus) taught.

Jesus came for the house of Israel....And Jesus taught Peter many years later that Jesus's promise as being for everyone God calls. You reject this change

Please be honest with everybody and just admit you reject THIS Gospel. At least be honest with yourself.

I explained it above and I have told you many times I agree and believe that Gospel, I even explained it to you and you repeat like a parrot the same nonsense like I haven't told you....that IQ education thing seems to be a projection because of your lack of understanding of Greek doesn't make you as smart as you think, it makes you bring a cursed message

And yet, Jesus taught his chosen apostles about it AFTER it had happened.

In the first book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus did and taught from the beginning until the day when he was taken up to heaven after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. After his suffering he presented himself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.- Acts 1:1-3 NRSV

I am gobsmacked that you can't wrap your head around this.

READ THE SCRIPTURE VERSES.

What changed with Jesus dying on the Cross and ascending to heaven? you are ignoring the start of the Church and Pentecost but....you don't believe the New Testament so would you rather talk about Islam or the kaballah, or your belief in water baptism etc but you constantly say the Bible is full of lies so why would you sejjust people read

If I may... your problem is that you either cannot read, or have problems with time.

Sigh.... Jesus spent FORTY DAYS after the cross reminding his chosen Apostles what He taught. Peter's sermon in Acts 2 is AFTER the cross. Paul's sermon in Acts 13 is AFTER the cross. So why do you LIE (and you are lying) when hurling the accusation that I ignore everything after the cross? Acts 2:38 is after the cross, and I am an Acts 2:38 Christian.

Peter testified why Jesus died. Paul said something else. Paul proclaimed a different gospel than that which Jesus and Peter did.

The problem is you cannot read Greek so it has you rejecting the bible. Why did Jesus about 15 years later have to teach Peter that Gentiles are included in the promises? there are many points but when you get emotional, you project yourself and just resort to acussing and saying the bible lied

So what's the "this"?

His Body and shedding his Blood, you only need to read and see what Jesus did next...But again you reject that Jesus laid his own life down....Do you realise there were many times they tried to kill Jesus, This was his choice he chose to the cross for his fathers will. and that is how he takes away the sin of the world...but you say he didnt die for our sins....

Hebrews 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

An enemy in this context would be someone that rejects his blood atonement ,you say Jesus didn't die for our sins...try figure it out

Paul wants you to curse me. Yet Jesus calls me blessed. And commands me to bless you.

That is not true, You are under a curse because you havent done what would release you from the curse, its more you are condemned already so it is showing that point.... not that I want to put a curse on you, Id rather you came out from that curse and that's why I'm talking to you but you call God a liar and Jesus a devil and you don't believe what the bible says, you would rather to learn greek you don't understand. so at what point is it

Titus 3:10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

You have 3899 posts as a heretic and you accused about 10 times in your first post to me when I was talking to someone else when I had 6 posts and all it took you to accuse was quoting the bible verse you called evil....lol you are not going to stop anytime soon as this site is set up for people like you

 

[Seethat]

No. I believe what Jeremiah said.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

You didn't take the time to read the entire chapter, pause and reflect and pray, did you.

You don't understand what Jeremiah said so how can you believe it, It is what the scribes did with the law and how they put it on the people, This is a Muslim argument and Muslims never understand the next verse

Jeremiah 8:9 The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord; and what wisdom is in them?

The problem is rejecting the word of the Lord, you are blind to scripture as you think it is a lie

You've done nothing to show me any other understanding of the actual scripture

I have, You ignore whatever scripture says and just parrot the bible is lying when it is talking about men, how can you get it this mixed up the context is very clear, you always talk about been uneducated why on earth did you try and learn Greek when you cannot even understand English

What does this mean, if it doesn't mean what it says?

They rejected the Word of the Lord...like you are doing

 

[Garee]

How can someone be saved if they do not believe God's Word? What would you consider blasphemy? Ill stick with calling Gods Word a lie or God a liar as blasphemy and you do what you gotta do

I would offer God calls blasphemy the attributing the invisible faithful power Christ's hidden eternal name giving it over to dying mankind as if God was a man as us.

They would be the antichrists "another teaching authority other than sola scriptura" spoken of in 1 John 2 . Antichrists, many a legion of false apostles bringing false prophecy as oral tradition of dying mankind

A great example is given in a parable found in Mathew 16. From my experience overlooked by many that look to venerate puff up Peter our brother in the Lord.

There Peter given false prophecy from Satan rebuked our unseen Holy Father and forbid the Son of man Jesus from doing the will of the Holy Father .

Peter was forgiven of blasphemy against the Son of man Jesus blasphemy against the Holy Father could never be forgiven in that case forgiveness is cut off

Mathew16:22-2Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.


Matthew 12:31-32 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Again, read Leviticus, and you will see that he did not speak to them, but to Moses.

Moses wasn't an ancestor? (C'mon, Nick.)

So, Leviticus is not true, or a deception?

Unless you think Moses lied about it.

No. I believe what Jeremiah said.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

You didn't take the time to read the entire chapter, pause and reflect and pray, did you.

So, then, even this could be from Jeremiah a lie since it has been penned by scribes over the years. AAAAhhhh now I get it....not really, but hey, that's who you are brother.

All I see is sacrificial practices, which were seen as accomplishing atonement for them through the blood, and Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross. Me simple, and you...it's a lie I tell you, it's a lie!!! Love you anyway because I know your outrage is sincere, if misguided!

Yes, they did continue... but it was not a thing that GOD commanded.

So, Leviticus is a lie? Okay. Just say it, and we can move on, but if you do, just remember you can't swim in quicksand....but I'll toss you a rope, because I love you...made by a good rope merchant of course, and not some scribe who is just copying willy nilly....

This is why the KILLED HIM. They Killed Jesus because he taught a forgiveness of sin that had nothing to do with animal (or any) blood sacrifice.

I AGREE!!! It just doesn't mean that the sacrifice of Jesus (body & blood) was of no account, but an actual necessity is what I am saying! Or you'd still be in your sins, if you only look at the NT accounts, makes this true! Gosh not only the Jews but the Devil himself had to believe that killing Jesus would get him out of the way and give them victory!

Think about it, scribes or no scribe changes. How many times in the OT was God angered for the shedding of blood that should never have happened, or just accounts of such incidents of man against man described by the shedding of blood? You can start with Cain & Abel and follow it to the cross! It was wrong the taking of life, and life for the flesh is in the blood. Even the JW's believe that!! lol

You have stated previously that the OT has been distorted, and so unreliable because of the scribes.

(Sigh..) No I didn't. Jeremiah did.

Yes, but you use it as if you had said it whenever it suits your argument.

What does this mean, if it doesn't mean what it says?

You take it and extrapolate it then that all of OT scripture is a lie. (shrug)
I'm a NT person/Gentile, and though the writers of the NT from all accounts were Jews, they were also believers in Jesus Christ, and why though they might have been lies, the Jews still understood the lie of sacrificial practices that were the lie, and which need not have been mentioned by Paul, because he knew they knew the lie, and only mentioned it to provide the support of the Word of Jesus concerning the Body & Blood to those who did not understand the lies about the sacrificial practices vs covenant practices.

[Luk 22:19-20 KJV] 19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake [it], and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. 20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new testament (covenant) in my blood, which is shed for you.

Now are you saying that the scribes messed up the Abrahamic Covenant as well concerning the blood/animal sacrificed between he and God?
Would it have been valid otherwise?
Would the Covenant with Jesus been valid without the shedding of His blood?

I understand that sacrifice is not what God wanted of them, but at that time, that is all they understood that was necessary, and not the change that we know can only happen through Jesus, Holy Spirit, in the NT, was still foreign to them and not understood no matter how many times they were told what God truly wanted from them! Was not Jeremiah filled with the Holy Spirit? Were the rest of the Jews?

None of that negates the sacrifice, and covenant binding of Jesus dying on the Cross through His body & blood and thereby the forgiveness of sin!

His words at Passover, should be enough to show you, but I doubt it.

I know the words of Jesus at Passover. (And I'll forgo quoting the actual Greek)

Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured-out into many for the forgiveness of sins.- Matthew 26:27-28 NRSV~

So tell me, Nick, what is the "this"?

It's not a hard question, and if you answer me honestly and without guile, hopefully we can continue the conversation.

If you understand the words of Jesus at Passover, then it shouldn't be hard to answer the question, what is the "this"?

I'm sorry you're getting frustrated, but it's like pulling teeth trying to get a rational answer out of Christians.

So now you're not a Christian?

Do I have to say again text, context, greater context! Of course I'm frustrated, for you'd of have been set back by even your 10th Grade Teacher expert, if they had to continue to repeat that one verse alone does not signify the entirety of meaning! Though I'm sure it could "Jesus wept", but more than that you'd be reading into it without the additional text available to you to use to know the why/wherefor.

Oh, I love you brother,

Not if you kill my voice, and refuse to answer. Don't kid yourself.

You just don't know how it would pain me to do.
You forget I'm a military man, and in that perspective, I understand what the Sanhedrin did in their decision-making concerning Jesus. Though wrong when taken into context. lol

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Rhema]

It doesn't say pretended, It says it was Jesus

Kind sir, you need to read what is written. And read without blind Faith. Read it as if you've never read it before. Wipe out all those wrong conclusions that live in your head. Yes, the voice said it was Jesus. But does that make it true? Read the account of Ananias (Again). Please, actually read it....

And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord. And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth, And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight. Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name. But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.​

(Acts 9:10-16 KJV)

Can you see what is missing? There is NO mention at all that the Lord Jesus confirmed to Ananias that He had stopped Paul on the way and blinded him. It would have been VERY easy for the Lord to have said, ".... enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, I have met him in the way and he is awaiting to be told what to do."

Instead, Ananias is told that Paul is praying. (I'm sure he was...) And I'm sure that he REPENTED in accordance with the Gospel that Jesus preached, and in doing so, the Lord had compassion on Paul to restore his eyesight, giving Paul a vision of what was about to happen.

I'm sure everybody believed Paul's testimony that Jesus actually blinded him. But nothing in Acts 9 testifies that the voice actually was Jesus. It just called itself Jesus.

For those who live in Blind Faith... there can never be an understanding of what actually happened without the Holy Spirit bringing wisdom. The Devil blinds people. The Devil curses people. Jesus restores sight, and Jesus blesses people. It's that simple.

I have no doubt that the Lord had indeed chosen Paul to be a minister of the Gospel of Jesus, right up until Paul turned that Gospel into offering a HUMAN blood sacrifice to pay for sins. But it wasn't that way in the beginning.

And when Paul's life came into jeopardy, the truth comes out. Paul WAS a Pharisee.

Once more we're to a position where we have to read what is written, and not let fictional religious tradition sweep things under the rug.

But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.​

(Acts 23:6 KJV)

He didn't say "I had been a Pharisee," Paul claimed to actually BE one... STILL. He only needed to have said "I was raised a Pharisee and am now called in question for believing in the resurrection of the dead."

I understand how irate and angry you are at me, because I'm calling the integrity of your venerated holy man into question. But had I asked you yesterday, could you have answered that Paul was indeed a Pharisee? One needs to look at the whole picture.

It's possible that you have been taught for years, decades(?) even, that the church was one big happy family and that all the leaders believed the exact same thing about Christ. I bought into that lie for quite awhile when young, until I learned at the age of 14 that I had to start reading what was actually written. And that I had to read with a critical eye. As an example, when Paul begs for unity, it means that there wasn't unity. So go dig down and find out the particulars. I did. But it might be shocking to learn that James and Paul were at each others' throat. The signs are there, to the point where the epistles of Galatians and James directly contradict one another in matters of doctrine, but that's a discussion for a later time.

My point here, is that the Apostleship of Paul was not accepted with warm fuzzy buzzy feelings. It was contentious. And standing back, it should be easy to see that James finally tricked Paul into getting arrested and sent to Rome, well out of James' hair. ALL sorts of excuses and stories are fabricated to cover this up - this power struggle between Peter, James and Paul; but it's there. By Acts 15 one can see that Peter lost control of the church to James - the same James who thought his brother Jesus was insane. But you have to read the accounts without preconceptions, without the rose coloured glasses. Even the historical accounts of Paul's travels differ between Acts and Galatians.

In Acts, Barnabas brings Paul to meet all the Twelve. But in Galatians, Paul went off to Arabia (my studied opinion is that Paul traveled to Mount Sinai to figure out what the heck just happened to him), and never saw the Twelve.

So why the boisterous claim from Paul that he learned the "Gospel" from special visions, as if one couldn't learn an accurate Gospel from Peter James (the other one) and John? Maybe because it was different.

The premise we start off is very easy. If Jesus came preaching the Gospel then that Gospel is what Jesus preached with no other adulteration allowed. As the Proto Orthodox church developed, it rejected the Teachings of Jesus and replaced them with a Teaching ABOUT Jesus. A Teaching that has significant contradictions with what Jesus actually taught.

Decades ago when I was in prayer, the Rhema of the Lord came to me and asked. "How can you forgive a debt that's been paid?"

Now that should bring any intelligent believer to a Hard Stop immediately. Sin is a debt that is owed to the creator when we live and act outside the boundaries of the Pattern that the Creator established for His creation.

Sin is the usurpation of the Sovereignty of God.

And when we do such a thing, we owe a debt to our creator. But debt can be discharged in one of two ways. The debt can be paid, after which the debt no longer exists. OR that very same debt can be forgiven, and when forgiven, it also no longer exists.

Jesus clearly taught that the Father forgives debt. The Father forgives sin. But you seem to reject this as some "Jewish" thing, and instead seem to believe that after the Resurrection, the blood of Jesus (as a HUMAN blood sacrifice) now pays off that debt to the Father.

Regardless, though, a Debt is either Paid, or it is Forgiven. It cannot be both. If an institution (or person) forgives you the debt of your mortgage, the debt no longer exists, but it wasn't paid for. And if you go to your bank and pay off your mortgage. The bank manager will rightly think you loony if you say, "Thank you for forgiving my loan." He didn't forgive your loan, you paid it.

But I know your argument is the bible lied after that..

You might want to make an appointment with your doctor and get that obstinate gene removed.

I never said that the Bible lied about that. The Bibles a book. People lie. And other people embrace lies. I submit that something happened between Acts 13 and 1 Cor. that caused Paul to change the message he preached. And that caused enough strife that Paul got hotheaded and started to curse people because they wouldn't accept his new scandalous revelation of HUMAN sacrifice.

Lol it says "I am Jesus whom thou persecutest." not I am pretending to be Jesus lol

You just cannot be this dense. ANY spirit pretending to be Jesus wouldn't SAY, "I am pretending to be Jesus." LOL

Please don't turn this conversation into a circus.

Acts 9 :5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

If you use a bad translation you will get a bad understanding.

He asked, "Who are you, Lord?" The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. But get up and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do."​

(Acts 9:5-6 NRSV)

But you don't know any Greek, so you're SOL. (Go get help.)

Muslims try and say Jesus was a devil in this instance, the bible does not

Another tired trope... Guilt by association so you can make me subhuman. Who cares what Muslims say? (I guess YOU DO.)

I do,

I do what? What education have you had? This is the third time I've given you my CV - Moravian Seminary and Princeton Theological. (Most all were classes on church history and language.) And your avoidance tells me all that I need to know about your supposed education. You don't have any, but don't want to lie, and you don't want to admit you have none or you'll look the fool. Get over your pride and be honest with yourself. If it's a problem for you, then go fix it.

from what you teach you are a mixture of Kabalist, Catholic and Muslim,

Still batting 1000 for being wrong. Your need to grasp at guilt by association borders on the psychotic.

but you don't pass any criteria for being a Christian

The Catholic says the same of you.

(As if I should care about your criteria. You being the God appointed arbiter of what composes the criteria for being a Christian LOL)

I say Jesus Is the Good news and the Saviour... and you ask do I do it? Is that a muslim type question?

Wow, maybe you truly ARE that dense.

A Muslim type question?

No.

That's a Jesus DIRECT question to YOU...

"Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I tell you?​

(Luke 6:46 NRSV)

I say Jesus Is the Good news

Yes, and that's the problem in a nut shell. Scripture directly says that Jesus PROCLAIMED the Good News.

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God,​

(Mark 1:14 NRSV)

And here is a good example of how you and I differ. You say crap that contradicts the scripture I post. That should really bother you, but instead of taking personal responsibility about this, you'd rather vilify me.

You have to start with believing in Jesus not calling him a devil and rejecting the word of God

Jesus is not a devil, and shame on you for that. What, are you like some 2 year old child? Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God, sent to PROCLAIM the Good News. The devil was that angel of light which called itself Jesus. That's all.

And with regards to your accusation that I reject the Word of God, which Word? You've been brainwashed to believe that the Bible is the Word of God, when the Bible DEFINES the Word of God. BOTH of them. There are two Words of God, but you are too full of yourself to even wonder what I'm talking about. Truly, you think you know it all. (And you're starting to tick the boxes for NPD.)

Through God, You believe what he said and you do it, It is easy as believing in the one that he sent, He needs to give you the new birth before you can become a child of God, as opposed to....You call him a devil and his word a lie

I can see why your wife would want to smack you upside the head. I have never called Jesus a devil. Just that angel of light in Acts 9 whom you wrongly think is Jesus just because it said so. Your gullibility is gargantuan.

Okay, so I am to believe what Jesus said and do it. (We agree. We greatly agree.) So what did Jesus say about the forgiveness of sin? (And did you do it?)

Jesus died for our sins

You truly don't understand just how vague that statement is. Now do you mean to say, "Jesus died to pay for our sins?" Then say it, but that's not what you actually wrote. I say Jesus died because sinful people murdered him. Don't you believe that? (Peter did. He directly said that.)

I know that statement holds great meaning to you. It's a common trope in Evangelical Christianity. But it doesn't convey information. You think that these words, "Jesus died for our sins" will trigger the same understanding up inside everyone's head as it does yours, but it doesn't. Now I'm not talking about whether people believe it or not, but I'm telling you flat out that the meaning of your words here is incomplete. I've had countless discussions about this shibboleth, but it always winds up to where the other person admits that he really meant to say "Jesus died to pay for our sins." I'm just wondering if it's the same with you.

Clarification would be greatly appreciated.

His Body and shedding his Blood,

That's not even close to answering the question I asked.

Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured-out INTO for many for the forgiveness of sins.​

(Matthew 26:27-28 NRSV~)

What is the "this" ??

The "this" is what was in the cup that he made them all drink.

What was in the cup?

It's an easy question, with a one word simple answer.

So I ask what was in the cup? (Don't go all Garee on me.)

As for the rest, again it would be worthless to address any more of your post until you get it.

What was in the cup? (What was the "this"?)

Blessings,
Rhema

 

[Garee]

Scripture does not say that the VOICE talking to Paul was Jesus. It says that the voice called itself Jesus.

Yes, not Jesus the Son of man. Jesus as dying mankind rather than the Christ, eternal God not seen

Christ the teaching Holy Spirit spoke though all the prophets as he did with Paul.

Before the born-again conversion as Saul. Saul followed the oral traditions of the fathers murdering those making all things written in the law and prophets (sola scriptura the reforming authroty ) without effect. They tried to judge him with their law (I heard it through the fathers' grape vine . but could not prove sola scriptura was a heresy or false prophecy

Acts22:3-5 am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the( murdering) fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished.

Acts 24:13;Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.;But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: (sola scriptura)

Paul worshiped the one God of his fathers. . not a legion of fathers as if one God

Sorry Rhema murdering those who trust sola scriptura does not make the living abiding word of God to no effect

The loving warning below continues to reveal those who do add and take away to the book of prophecy.

There simply is no defense against the Christian's defense the shield of faith (Sola scriptura)

Revelation 22:18;For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book

Is Sola scriptura a heresy as Saul once said before born from above?