Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If the Bible is metaphorical then perhaps so is the God of the Bible
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 211 of 243 (514154)
07-04-2009 8:14 AM


Baily,
I think it was in this discussion you objected to me using the phrase Satanification or Satanified to discribe the fallen man from Genesis.
Just on that point I would add this in defense of this view:
"And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed; He will bruise you on the head, But you will bruise him on the heel." (Genesis 3:15)
The serpent's seed are the people who follow Satan. Because Satan, the old serpent (Rev.12:9; 20:2), has injected himself as sin into man's flesh. (For this we would need a discussion of Romans chapter 7). This is only a brief comment.
In the eyes of God all men have become serpents:

"Serpents! Brood of vipers! How shall you escape the judgment of Gehenna?" (Matthew 23:33)
I think that the symbolisim of Numbers 21:4-9 when the Israelites were bitten by poisoness serpents and all had to look upon the brass serpent lifted on the pole, indicates that in God's eyes all mankind is poisoned by Satan making them his followers and his offspring. (Compare Numbers 21:4-9 with John 3:14-21)
Anyway, fallen men as Satan's followers, are his sons, his seed, not by adoption but by birth:

"But when he [John the Baptist] saw many of the Pharisees and Sadduces coming to his baptism, he said to them, Offspring of vipers, who prompted you to flee from the coming wrath? (Matt. 3:7)
"And the field is the world; and the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one ..." (Matt. 13:38)
"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father ..." (John 8:44)
"In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest." (1 John 3:10)
These phrases, "offspring of vipers," "sons of the evil one," "children of the devil," "your father the devil" all indicate this Satanic, or if you will "serpentine" nature and life has embedded itself in fallen mankind. These people are used to persecute and fight against the woman's seed.
So we need to be born again, regenerated, (not just adopted) by Jesus Christ to become children of God. And we need to live by the new nature and have the old crucified with Christ through faith.
Comment on this point Baily ?

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Bailey, posted 07-05-2009 11:56 PM jaywill has replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 212 of 243 (514300)
07-05-2009 11:56 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by jaywill
07-04-2009 8:14 AM


broods o' vipers & venomous serpents
Thank you for the exchange brutha jay.
Hope things are well my friend.
I think it was in this discussion you objected to me using the phrase Satanification or Satanified to discribe the fallen man from Genesis.
Just on that point I would add this in defense of this view:
"And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed; He will bruise you on the head, But you will bruise him on the heel." (Genesis 3:15)
The serpent's seed are the people who follow Satan. Because Satan, the old serpent (Rev.12:9; 20:2), has injected himself as sin into man's flesh. (For this we would need a discussion of Romans chapter 7). This is only a brief comment.
We should do well to agree that any influence afforded through HaSaTaN is, first, accomplished in thoughts.
Our words form our heart. Our hearts birth our thoughts. Our thoughts give way to deeds.
In this way, we are all HaSaTaN, as we all have thoughts not yet captive to Love.
Fair 'nuf?
In the eyes of God all men have become serpents:

"Serpents! Brood of vipers! How shall you escape the judgment of Gehenna?" (Matthew 23:33)
Again, to keep things in context, it seems important to note that Yeshua was specifically addressing religious leaders. Not everybody. This should not be a surprise, as this is what Prophets always did.
Yeshua HaMashiach referred to the acting government officials of Yuhdaism, which would be the 'church' & 'state', as 'serpents' and 'broods o' vipers' that may not know how to 'escape the judgment of Gehinom'.
Fair 'nuf?
I think that the symbolisim of Numbers 21:4-9 when the Israelites were bitten by poisoness serpents and all had to look upon the brass serpent lifted on the pole, indicates that in God's eyes all mankind is poisoned by Satan making them his followers and his offspring. (Compare Numbers 21:4-9 with John 3:14-21)
Interesting. If I was to philosophize with you, I may suggest that the symbolism of Numbers, when the Israelites were bitten by poisoness serpents that had gathered all around the surrounding landscape and, to be healed from those snake bites, one had to look upon the brass serpent lifted on the pole, indicates that all the practitioners of the various Yuhdaic sects, in the time of Yeshua, were being bitten by the acting government officials of Yuhdea who are symbolized as 'serpents' and 'broods o' vipers'.
When the infected practitioners, who were burdened by the rigors and deceit of the sacrificial system which had been implemented, look upon Yeshua - the bronze serpent - as HaMashiach, it equates to the infected human absorbing HaMachiach's message of 'mercy, not sacrafice', which then alleviates the threat of doom without sacrifice, hence, bringing relief to the practitioners within the tradition.
What do you think?
Anyway, fallen men as Satan's followers, are his sons, his seed, not by adoption but by birth ... Matt. 3:7, Matt. 13:38, John 8:44, 1 John 3:10)
These phrases, "offspring of vipers," "sons of the evil one," "children of the devil," "your father the devil" all indicate this Satanic, or if you will "serpentine" nature and life has embedded itself in fallen mankind.
Again, the verses you choose to support the filthy pig doctrine seem to apply to religious leaders, not necessarily practitioners of the traditions themselves.
Do you have any verses where Yeshua or His disciples cast these descriptions towards the masses or simply the ones you've provided that speak to the priestly castes?
These people are used to persecute and fight against the woman's seed.
If by 'these people', you mean those who refer to themselves as 'Pastor' or 'Rabbi', I would likely agree.
So we need to be born again, regenerated, (not just adopted) by Jesus Christ to become children of God.
And we need to live by the new nature and have the old crucified with Christ through faith.
Comment on this point Bailey ?
It seems that the ones who need to born again are the ones who were sacrificed, by malignant priests, to venomous serpentine lies. Everyone, idk?
At this point, if I was to make a comment in context, I may suppose that a person who has been bit by a priest that claims God desires a sacrificial system may do well to look upon Yeshua as the 'bronze serpent' and understand that the Father desires mercy, not sacrifice. What say ye, brutha jay?
One Love

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have condemned the innocent; why trust what I say when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by jaywill, posted 07-04-2009 8:14 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Phat, posted 07-07-2009 11:37 AM Bailey has not replied
 Message 214 by jaywill, posted 07-08-2009 3:59 PM Bailey has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 213 of 243 (514414)
07-07-2009 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 212 by Bailey
07-05-2009 11:56 PM


The Metaphor Of Determinism
Bailey writes:
We should do well to agree that any influence afforded through HaSaTaN is, first, accomplished in thoughts.
Our words form our heart. Our hearts birth our thoughts. Our thoughts give way to deeds.
In this way, we are all HaSaTaN, as we all have thoughts not yet captive to Love.
Philosophically, I agree. I believe that we have the choice to imagine/create our own destiny and can do so either actively or passively. If one accepts that their life is predetermined, they can passively allow their destiny to unfold. If one believes that the decisions and actions that they make shape their destiny, they thus actively involve themselves in the process.
Some say that they die daily and surrender themselves to God but in essence this can become a form of passive imagination.
One can be either a believer or an atheist, however, and actively contribute to their destiny as it unfolds one moment at a time.
TheFreeDictionary writes:
determinism n.
The philosophical doctrine that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs.
Edited by Phat, : fixed quote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Bailey, posted 07-05-2009 11:56 PM Bailey has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 214 of 243 (514527)
07-08-2009 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Bailey
07-05-2009 11:56 PM


Re: broods o' vipers & venomous serpents
We should do well to agree that any influence afforded through HaSaTaN is, first, accomplished in thoughts.
Our words form our heart. Our hearts birth our thoughts. Our thoughts give way to deeds.
In this way, we are all HaSaTaN, as we all have thoughts not yet captive to Love.
The Apostle Paul does say that the Satanic spirit is operating in the sons of disobedience, causing them to do the desires of the flesh and of the THOUGHTS. So the thought life of all sinners is effected by this attack. Quite true:
" ... the ruler of the authority of the air, of the spirit which is now operating in the sons of disobedience; among whom we also all conducted ourselves in the lust of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the thoughts, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as the rest." (Eph. 2:2,3)
I would never suggest that this Satanic enfuence is not also on the thought life.
Notice that Paul first mentions "the lust of our flesh" as the realm of conduct instigated by "the spirit which is now operating in the sons of disobedience".
It may be significant that Paul did not first write that these children of disobedience did not follow first the lust of the thoughts.
It is also significant to me that Paul says that nothing good "dwells" in his flesh.
"For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, nothing good dwells ..." (Romans 7:18)
And Paul locates the problem in the "members" of his body:
"But I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which is in my members." (Rom.7:23)
Paul also emphasizes that it is his body which is wretched and is "the BODY of this death"
"Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from the body of this death?
Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord!" (v.224,25a)
Paul concludes with a review that his mind delights in the law of God but with his flesh he serves the law of sin which he has already located in his members:
"So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh, the law of sin." (v.25b)
Now it took me years to realize this. But this problem in man's flesh must go back to the actual eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I do not understand everything about this. But it seems "the body of this death" must have commenced from something entering into the body of the first man and woman.
Simultaneously with that injection of something foreign and evil into the flesh of man the evil spirit of the authority of the air began operating in the children of disobedience.
Now this phrase children of disobedience should mean not just religious types like scribed, Pharisees, priests, and lawyers who opposed Jesus, but all children of the disobedient Adam. In other words all people are implicated.
Further I see that they are all called "children of wrath" and that "by nature".
The good question you raise is whether those in such danger of the Gehenna sentence are only the religious opposition or all "children of wrath?" It sounds to me like all by nature, children of wrath are in danger of the sentence of Gehenna.
I am inclined to understand that the sharp rebukes of ( Matt. 3:7, Matt. 13:38, John 8:44, 1 John 3:10) did not mean that ALL people are not so evilly inclined but only that THESE particular religionists took a special leading role to oppose Christ.
It is clear that ALL sinners are enemies of God in need of reconcilation.
"For if we, being enemies, were reconciled to God through the death of His Son ..." (Romans 5:10)
How then does the typical sinner fare that much better than the enemies of the opposing Pharisees and opposing religionists?
How much we give in to that evil nature may enfluence how severe a rebuke we receive from the Lord. In the case of His harsh rebukes of ( Matt. 3:7, Matt. 13:38, John 8:44, 1 John 3:10) I don't have the confidence that it somehow absolves the rest of us.
In the eyes of God all men have become serpents:
"Serpents! Brood of vipers! How shall you escape the judgment of Gehenna?" (Matthew 23:33)
Again, to keep things in context, it seems important to note that Yeshua was specifically addressing religious leaders. Not everybody. This should not be a surprise, as this is what Prophets always did.
I tried to explain my view above. Is there any real difference between the "sons of disobedience" (Eph. 2:2) who are also [b]"childen of wrath, even as the rest" (Eph. 2:3)? and the vipers who are in danger of the sentence of Gehenna ?
The repentent ones are less stubburn. The stubburn ones take the lead in society to oppose the salvation of Jesus directly. That is the only difference I see. So the latter receive a stiffer rebuke. It does not mean that the former are not also free from the evil nature.
Remember, it is "by NATURE children of wrath" (Eph. 2:3). And Paul definitely is not speaking only to religionists in Ephesians 2.
Yeshua HaMashiach referred to the acting government officials of Yuhdaism, which would be the 'church' & 'state', as 'serpents' and 'broods o' vipers' that may not know how to 'escape the judgment of Gehinom'.
Fair 'nuf?
Above discussion, I think, implicates all fallen sinners. The religionist of militant opposition just receive a more severe rebuke about it.
jaywill:
I think that the symbolisim of Numbers 21:4-9 when the Israelites were bitten by poisoness serpents and all had to look upon the brass serpent lifted on the pole, indicates that in God's eyes all mankind is poisoned by Satan making them his followers and his offspring. (Compare Numbers 21:4-9 with John 3:14-21)
Baily:
Interesting. If I was to philosophize with you, I may suggest that the symbolism of Numbers, when the Israelites were bitten by poisoness serpents that had gathered all around the surrounding landscape and, to be healed from those snake bites, one had to look upon the brass serpent lifted on the pole, indicates that all the practitioners of the various Yuhdaic sects, in the time of Yeshua, were being bitten by the acting government officials of Yuhdea who are symbolized as 'serpents' and 'broods o' vipers'.
According to the way Jesus used the parable it was all the world which needed that salvation:
"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that every one who believes into Him may have eternal life.
For God so loved the WORLD that He gave His only begotten Son, that every one who believes into Him would not perish, but would have eternal life.
For God did not send His Son into the world to condenm the WORLD, but that the WORLD might be saved through Him." (John 3:14-17 my emphasis)
And the Gehenna of fire that the religionists were in danger of and the perishing that the world is in danger of pretty much puts them on the same level. Don't you think so?
When the infected practitioners,
Once again here. It is hard for me to imagine that they only became infected when they entered into the religious or political system. I think they were already infected before they entered into it. They were infected from birth.
As David tells us:
"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." (Psalm 51:5)
And this was a man who was after the heart of God.
Furthermore Ecclesiastes tells us that God made man upright but that man sought out deceptive schemes skewing his upright nature:
" ...this alone I have found, that God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes." (Ecc. 7:29)
And the fact that "the wicked go astray from the womb, they err from [their] birth speaking lies" (Psalm 58:3) shows that they do not do so only when entering into the religious or political systems. But in entering into human life they have a sinning nature.
You may argue that the vipers is too strong a language to use for common sinners. You may argue that it should be reserved for the relgionists who opposed Jesus. However the Bible says that "the poison of the asp" is under the lips of the typical sinner (Romans 3:13 comp Psalm 140:3)
Face it Baily. We sinners are a generation of vipers in need of the redemptive salvation of Jesus Christ.
who were burdened by the rigors and deceit of the sacrificial system which had been implemented, look upon Yeshua - the bronze serpent - as HaMashiach, it equates to the infected human absorbing HaMachiach's message of 'mercy, not sacrafice', which then alleviates the threat of doom without sacrifice, hence, bringing relief to the practitioners within the tradition.
What do you think?
I will think about this. I am running out of time. But remember that the sacrifices ordained by God were not deceitful in themselves. The abuse of them became deceitful. And the refusal to recognize that they all pointed to the sacrifice of the Son of God once and for all, became a tool of opposition.
jaywill:
Anyway, fallen men as Satan's followers, are his sons, his seed, not by adoption but by birth ... Matt. 3:7, Matt. 13:38, John 8:44, 1 John 3:10)
These phrases, "offspring of vipers," "sons of the evil one," "children of the devil," "your father the devil" all indicate this Satanic, or if you will "serpentine" nature and life has embedded itself in fallen mankind.
Baily:
Again, the verses you choose to support the filthy pig doctrine seem to apply to religious leaders, not necessarily practitioners of the traditions themselves.
Sins are indeed filthy. Do you deny this?
I am not familiar with a "Filthy Pig doctrine". So I am wary of saying "Yes, Yes, this is the Filthy Pig Doctrine". For I do not know what you mean by that phrase.
I was filthy though until I learned to apply the precious cleansing blood of Jesus to my filthy sins.
I think a filthy sinner is not a filthy pig. God so loved the sinner, even though he was one, that He came in Christ to save him and wash away the impurity of his sins.
Do you have any verses where Yeshua or His disciples cast these descriptions towards the masses or simply the ones you've provided that speak to the priestly castes?
As I said, off hand, I think that these harsher rebukes fell on the opposers of a militant nature. They, however, do not mean that we typical sinners do not have the same fallen nature as these militant opposers to Jesus.
The penalty appears to be the same for opposing religionist and all those whose names are not found written in the book of life:
"And if anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire" (Rev. 20:15)
So all sinners need to have their names written in the Lamb's book of life for redemption from eternal perdition. And He is so willing to save us. We just need to believe into the name of the Son of God.
Then our condemnation took place already, in the body of Jesus Christ on His cross at Calvary. Justice was imputed in Him on behalf of the believing sinner. Marvelous. Praise to the Lord Jesus!
These people are used to persecute and fight against the woman's seed.
If by 'these people', you mean those who refer to themselves as 'Pastor' or 'Rabbi', I would likely agree.
Not all have to oppose. And the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25 show that the sheep were kind to the persecuted brethren of Jesus, even to the least of these His brothers.
But this passage in Matthew 25 concerns a special time at the very close of this church age. Throughout the Gospel age we are called to beleive into the Son of God that we may be saved.
It seems that the ones who need to born again are the ones who were sacrificed, by malignant priests, to venomous serpentine lies. Everyone, idk?
At this point, if I was to make a comment in context, I may suppose that a person who has been bit by a priest that claims God desires a sacrificial system may do well to look upon Yeshua as the 'bronze serpent' and understand that the Father desires mercy, not sacrifice. What say ye, brutha jay?
It sounds like you have some complaint that I cannot readily fathom.
Perhaps you have some problem with the religionists of today. I think that that issue and the redemption of Christ upon all men need to not be confused.
As being born is only the beginning of human life and one must develop and grow, so spiritually. Being born again is only the beginning of the spiritual journey to also develop and grow spiritually.
And many do get sidetracked and distracted in religion. We need to look to the Lord's mercy that we would not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Bailey, posted 07-05-2009 11:56 PM Bailey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by Bailey, posted 07-08-2009 7:39 PM jaywill has replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 215 of 243 (514550)
07-08-2009 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by jaywill
07-08-2009 3:59 PM


Re: broods o' vipers & venomous serpents
Thanks for the exchange brutha jay.
Hope things are good with you ...
I have noticed that you hang the majority of your interpretations on Paul's coat hook ...
Uncle Paul's semi-narcissistic, while mildly apocalyptic, views may appear to salvage a Prophetic belief in the Father's power and justice, yet, there is the sense that this is accomplished by one shifting the focus of their religious attention from the community as the primary beneficiary of the Father's justice in this life, who may be rewarded with shalom, peace and prosperity, to the individual, who will receive his or her just reward in an afterlife. That does not seem to be a tradition that everyone can identify with and I, for one, am often unable to find practicality in Pauline dogmas and theology.
I will try to respond accordingly ...
brutha jay writes:
weary writes:
Our words form our heart. Our hearts birth our thoughts. Our thoughts give way to deeds.
Notice that Paul first mentions "the lust of our flesh" as the realm of conduct instigated by "the spirit which is now operating in the sons of disobedience".
It may be significant that Paul did not first write that these children of disobedience did not follow first the lust of the thoughts.
It seems that the message behind HaMashiach's interpretation of ToRaH was that one must adjust their thoughts, before they can address their deeds. Yeshua clearly admonishes within His tradition that, 'The things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these things defile a person'.
It is also significant to me that Paul says that nothing good "dwells" in his flesh.
"For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, nothing good dwells ..." (Romans 7:18)
And Paul locates the problem in the "members" of his body:
"But I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which is in my members." (Rom.7:23)
Yes, I would agree that it seems like warring was very deeply embedded within the 'members' of Paul's 'flesh', aka. human appendages, although, as well, his thoughts too. Assuming he was right handed, that is where the bulk of his warring was dispatched from his heart and mind, as he pummeled to death, or held the coats of those who did, many who were unwilling, like the angry traditionalists who requested the responsibility clearly refused by Pilate, to claim the innocent blood of Yeshua's venemous murder upon themselves and their children.
quote:
When Pilate saw that he could do nothing ... he took some water, washed his hands before the crowd and said ...
I am innocent of this man’s blood. You take care of it yourselves!
In reply all the people [happy about murdering HaMashiach] said ...
Let his blood be on us and on our children !!
So, the deeds of the murderous traditions claimed Yeshua's innocent blood, first, with their very own words.
Remember brutha Yacov's wise words as well ...
quote:
3:5 ~ The tongue is a small part of the body, yet it has great pretensions. Think how small a flame sets a huge forest ablaze.
3:6 ~ And the tongue is a fire! The tongue represents the world of wrongdoing among the parts of our bodies.
It pollutes the entire body and sets fire to the course of human existence — and is set on fire by Gehinom.
3:7 ~ For every kind of animal, bird, reptile, and sea creature is subdued and has been subdued by humankind.
3:8 ~ But no human being can subdue the tongue; it is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.
4:1 ~ Where do the conflicts and where do the quarrels among you come from?
Is it not from this, from your passions that battle inside you?

Judas words also comes to mind, while contrasting the dynamics of these SaTaNiC thoughts and deeds, when he is depicted as saying ...
'I have sinned by betraying innocent blood !!'
That is all the time I have for now.
Off to enjoy time with the fam ...
I'll try to respond mo', later.
One Love
Edited by Bailey, : sp.

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have condemned the innocent; why trust what I say when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by jaywill, posted 07-08-2009 3:59 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by jaywill, posted 07-08-2009 8:42 PM Bailey has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 216 of 243 (514556)
07-08-2009 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Bailey
07-08-2009 7:39 PM


Re: broods o' vipers & venomous serpents
I have noticed that you hang the majority of your interpretations on Paul's coat hook ...
God used the man to write 13 or so books of the 27 New Testament books.
God did not consult with me for permission to do so. Neither did He ask for your advice. Since He places the members in the Body as it pleases Him, we should just say AMEN, and submit ourselves to God's sovereign arrangement.
The Apostle Peter recommended Paul's wisdom (2 Peter 3:15,16). I don't know why you would not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Bailey, posted 07-08-2009 7:39 PM Bailey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by Bailey, posted 07-08-2009 10:15 PM jaywill has replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 217 of 243 (514561)
07-08-2009 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by jaywill
07-08-2009 8:42 PM


Re: broods o' vipers & venomous serpents
Thanks for the exchange brutha jay.
Hope things are well with you ...
brutha jay writes:
weary writes:
I have noticed that you hang the majority of your interpretations on Paul's coat hook ...
God used the man to write 13 or so books of the 27 New Testament books.
God did not consult with me for permission to do so. Neither did He ask for your advice. Since He places the members in the Body as it pleases Him, we should just say AMEN, and submit ourselves to God's sovereign arrangement.
The Apostle Peter recommended Paul's wisdom (2 Peter 3:15,16). I don't know why you would not.
lol - now, now ...
I never said that I would not ol' friend. However, the doctrines and subsequent theologies which must continue to evolve from the remains of uncle Paul's letters have always been highly subjective and their volatility often remains unpredictable. Consider Kefa's very own words in the verse you quoted ...
Some things in these letters are hard to understand ...
Things the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they also do to the rest of the scriptures.
So, uncle Paul's letters are frequently inclined to misinterpretation according to even the Apostle Kefa. There is the sense one may understand them more clearly with some extensive formal training in the original testament Yuhdaic traditions, such as the pretense they were written under. Honestly, the Father has provided the Prophetic booklets for our admonishment, which are often overshadowed by the corruptions given to poor ol' Paul's militaristic world view.
It is all but obvious that brutha Kefa is aware of a certain tendency afforded to uncle Paul's scriptures by those unlearned, wherein the Pharisidic letters are used to support the doctrine of Yeshua as a Levitical animal sacrifice. Now, while every scripture is inspired by the Father and useful for learning, for reproof, for correction and training in the Anointing, I received no specific command to draw from the writings of either Kefa or Paul. Perhaps you did.
Nevertheless, Yeshua admonishes us - not brutha Kefa or uncle Paul - what literature will serve His disciples well as far as HaMashiach is concerned. Within the few Gospels selected for compilation into the Roman scripture text collection, Yeshua refers to three parts of the TaNaKh by name - the Torah (Law), the Nevi'im (Prophets) and the Tehellim (Psalms).
Now, if Yeshua HaMashiach recommended the wisdom of such literature, I am truly at a loss why you may choose to perform otherwise.
Yet, as surely as I say to you, from the beginning, towards the middle and in the end, Mashiach's must answer to their One teacher.
quote:
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.

quote:
In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.
quote:
Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?
He said to him ...
You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.
This is the greatest and first commandment.
And a second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'
On these two commandments hang all the
law and the prophets.
quote:
The law and the prophets were in effect until Yochan came; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is proclaimed, and everyone tries to enter it by force.
But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one stroke of a letter in the law to be dropped.

quote:
Then he said to them ...
These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you - that everything written about me in the law of Moses', the prophets, and the psalms must be fulfilled.
One Love
Edited by Bailey, : sp.

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have condemned the innocent; why trust what I say when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by jaywill, posted 07-08-2009 8:42 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by jaywill, posted 07-09-2009 9:54 PM Bailey has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 218 of 243 (514646)
07-09-2009 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Bailey
07-08-2009 10:15 PM


Re: broods o' vipers & venomous serpents
lol - now, now ...
I never said that I would not ol' friend. However, the doctrines and subsequent theologies which must continue to evolve from the remains of uncle Paul's letters have always been highly subjective and their volatility often remains unpredictable. Consider Kefa's very own words in the verse you quoted ...
Some things in these letters are hard to understand ...
Things the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they also do to the rest of the scriptures.
The key phrase there is as they do the REST of Scripture.
You don't avoid the rest of Scripture because ignorant and unstable people twist it do you?
So, uncle Paul's letters are frequently inclined to misinterpretation according to even the Apostle Kefa. There is the sense one may understand them more clearly with some extensive formal training in the original testament Yuhdaic traditions, such as the pretense they were written under.
Experience in the spiritual walk is a vital ingredient.
And while we are on the subject of possible misunderstandings, I sure have to think twice about who you are talking about because of your insistance in using Hebrew names.
Kefa ??? Oh, that's Peter I guess. Excuse my naivete of Hebrew names here.
Honestly, the Father has provided the Prophetic booklets for our admonishment, which are often overshadowed by the corruptions given to poor ol' Paul's militaristic world view.
Oh brother. "Paul's militaristic world view". sigh.
I think I'll call it a night. Goodnight.
Debating the Apostle Paul's strategic military moves for world domination is just not something I'm up to tonight.
Victory by means of absurdity.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Bailey, posted 07-08-2009 10:15 PM Bailey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by Bailey, posted 07-10-2009 8:18 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 243 by Bailey, posted 08-11-2009 5:21 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 219 of 243 (514686)
07-10-2009 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by jaywill
07-09-2009 9:54 PM


Re: broods o' vipers & venomous serpents
Thanks for the exchange brutha jay ...
Hope all is well with you & the fam.
Debating the Apostle Paul's strategic military moves for world domination is just not something I'm up to tonight.
I hope not. Unless you're debating against it, as I would be.
Victory by means of absurdity.
lol - Providing yardwork gets completed early enough tomorrow, I'll take a moment to hopefully straighten out the various misrepresentations which have been afforded to my position. For now, let's just say, I love uncle Paul and you more than I love myself.
You're both family to me.
One Love
Edited by Bailey, : punct.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by jaywill, posted 07-09-2009 9:54 PM jaywill has not replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5238 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 220 of 243 (515458)
07-18-2009 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by CarlinKnew
05-21-2009 6:31 PM


For one thing, most who become Christians do so for a practical reason- because they have experienced a personal change for the better in someone else, a change that they quite often find difficult to explain. So the claimed source of that change, the Bible, becomes for them a source of interest, and in time becomes validated by 'the proof of the pudding', the eating of said 'dessert'. Let us call that personal experience Factor A.
Now, as the Bible itself indicates, Christian faith may be considered futile unless there was a real person called Jesus who was raised from the dead to give hope for an afterlife. There is nothing in the Bible to give indication that Jesus was a fictional character, as is very obvious with literary (?) characters such as Bugs Bunny, a rabbit that talks. Now nobody takes that character's speech as a miracle, not even young children, who do not either expect their own pet rabbits to talk (ok, so you did). But turning water into wine, that could 'happen' where the Pink Panther is around, is meant to be an actual event, a miracle, when Jesus is around. So one is supposed to take that account literally, otherwise there is no point to it. That does not mean that the account is true; just that the author evidently intended the event to be considered miraculous. Let us call that, evidence that Jesus literally existed, Factor B.
So, putting Factors A and B together, we can see the logic employed in believing that there was an historic Jesus. Now from the existence of Jesus, as believed, there must be more historical fact to be accepted, because Jesus did not exist in a vacuum, but in a well-defined context, that surrounds him chronologically. The accounts of Jesus' followers, that have been highly influential, the fact that the Roman Empire gave up its deities in favour of Jesus (or a caricature of him), support his reality. The existence of the Jewish nation (continuing, despite attempts to exterminate it) and the so-called 'Holy Land' with its identifiable historic locations, both intended to provide prophetic validation of Jesus as Messiah, tend to indicate his reality. They may not be considered proof of that reality, but they may be considered evidence adequate to explain Factor A, and to support Factor B.
Now even the most determined fundamentalist cannot deny that there is figurative language in the Bible (though one never hears them admit that it exists). Obviously, even in their eyes, Jesus is/was not a door, or bread, and certainly not both at the same time. Quite where Bible allegory ends and where Bible history begins is a matter of opinion, and, dare one say it, of scholarship, though for those of us who have been around a while, archaeology and science are as subject to fashions and political pressures as anything else. It may be unwise to make categoric statements where these fields impinge on Biblical issues, as expert opinion on an issue can change within one's lifetime, and more than once! But precisely where the truth lies may be quite unimportant to a believer anyway, and perhaps should be. An account of an incident in the life of an Old Testament character may have spiritual importance that is quite independent of whether the account is historical. The believer reads in order to apply the moral or spiritual aspect of the story, literal or allegorical, to his or her personal life, and that aspect is the truth for that person. Such considerations are thought to have a life of their own, that relate to other parts of the Bible in a similar and convincing way, though on a spiritual level.
Edited by ochaye, : Clarification.
Edited by ochaye, : improved clarity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CarlinKnew, posted 05-21-2009 6:31 PM CarlinKnew has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by themasterdebator, posted 07-19-2009 12:27 AM ochaye has replied

  
themasterdebator
Inactive Member


Message 221 of 243 (515558)
07-19-2009 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by ochaye
07-18-2009 8:54 AM


Now, as the Bible itself indicates, Christian faith may be considered futile unless there was a real person called Jesus who was raised from the dead to give hope for an afterlife. There is nothing in the Bible to give indication that Jesus was a fictional character, as is very obvious with literary (?) characters such as Bugs Bunny, a rabbit that talks. Now nobody takes that character's speech as a miracle, not even young children, who do not either expect their own pet rabbits to talk (ok, so you did). But turning water into wine, that could 'happen' where the Pink Panther is around, is meant to be an actual event, a miracle, when Jesus is around. So one is supposed to take that account literally, otherwise there is no point to it. That does not mean that the account is true; just that the author evidently intended the event to be considered miraculous. Let us call that, evidence that Jesus literally existed, Factor B.
1) How do you differentiate between "fictional" miracles and non fiction miracles? For instance, the Bible tells us that a snake talks to Adam and Eve. How would that be different that a rabbit talking? And "its obvious" is not an answer. Supernatural activity is supernatural activity, regardless of the extent it takes.
2) Many religions can claim the exact same thing. Muslims for instance also claim the Quran is a real record of events. The Greeks Mythology was based on events people wrote about and really believed happened. Why would the Biblical evidence be any better? Much of it is also Anecdotal. John for instance, wrote his book in around 90 AD, and relied on stories passed down in the local areas, which would put it right up there with evidence for vampires and werewolves.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by ochaye, posted 07-18-2009 8:54 AM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by ochaye, posted 07-19-2009 8:36 AM themasterdebator has not replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5238 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 222 of 243 (515569)
07-19-2009 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by themasterdebator
07-19-2009 12:27 AM


quote:
How do you differentiate between "fictional" miracles and non fiction miracles? For instance, the Bible tells us that a snake talks to Adam and Eve. How would that be different that a rabbit talking?
It wouldn't be any different. That's the point. The difference comes only in the purpose. The fact of snake or rabbit talking is not an issue. What is important is what they say. The purpose of Bugs Bunny is, ostensibly at least, to entertain ("What's up, Doc?"), the purpose of the Edenic snake is to make a moral/spiritual point. Neither creature is intended to be thought of as having any actual existence. Both animals are used because they have anthropomorphic associations- friendly, harmless; sinister, dangerous, that provide ready assimilation of their respective legends.
Now the story (true or otherwise) of the actual donkey that spoke to an actual prophet to warn him, that is intended to be understood as miracle. Obviously, may I add.
quote:
Many religions can claim the exact same thing. Muslims for instance also claim the Quran is a real record of events. The Greeks Mythology was based on events people wrote about and really believed happened. Why would the Biblical evidence be any better?
Why would one suppose that it is? Perhaps it isn't better. The reason for many accepting the Bible is because it produces Factor A, personal changes in people that are reckoned beneficial. No doubt other beliefs provide reasons for people accepting their source books also, but this thread is about the Bible, its use of metaphor in particular, and finding the solution to problems perceived due to the presence and use of metaphor. Anything beside that is properly placed in another thread, and when people begin to reach for other topics, the solution seems to have been reached.
Edited by ochaye, : No reason given.
Edited by ochaye, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by themasterdebator, posted 07-19-2009 12:27 AM themasterdebator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by jaywill, posted 07-24-2009 3:38 AM ochaye has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 223 of 243 (516204)
07-24-2009 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by ochaye
07-19-2009 8:36 AM


It wouldn't be any different. That's the point. The difference comes only in the purpose. The fact of snake or rabbit talking is not an issue. What is important is what they say. The purpose of Bugs Bunny is, ostensibly at least, to entertain ("What's up, Doc?"), the purpose of the Edenic snake is to make a moral/spiritual point. Neither creature is intended to be thought of as having any actual existence. Both animals are used because they have anthropomorphic associations- friendly, harmless; sinister, dangerous, that provide ready assimilation of their respective legends.
Now the story (true or otherwise) of the actual donkey that spoke to an actual prophet to warn him, that is intended to be understood as miracle. Obviously, may I add.
Ochave, if the donkey speaking in the book of Numbers is viewed as a miracle then why cannot the speaking serpent in Genesis be viewed the same way ?
It has been noted in studies on biblical miracles that very often they come in pairs. That is many miracles are presented twice. This struck me when I read a survey on the subject of Bible miracles.
Now why is the speaking donkey in Numbers not a candidate for the second in the pair, matching the speaking serpent in Genesis?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by ochaye, posted 07-19-2009 8:36 AM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by ochaye, posted 07-24-2009 6:56 AM jaywill has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5238 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 224 of 243 (516223)
07-24-2009 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by jaywill
07-24-2009 3:38 AM


'if the donkey speaking in the book of Numbers is viewed as a miracle then why cannot the speaking serpent in Genesis be viewed the same way ?'
That can be done. I've never heard of anyone doing it, though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by jaywill, posted 07-24-2009 3:38 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by jaywill, posted 07-24-2009 1:16 PM ochaye has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 225 of 243 (516288)
07-24-2009 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by ochaye
07-24-2009 6:56 AM


That can be done. I've never heard of anyone doing it, though.
Hi. I'm jaywill - lover of Christ, lover of the Bible.
I think the speaking serpent in Genesis is the other instance in the pair of a miraculous event of an animal talking.
Do not think that I have not carefully considered other possibilities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by ochaye, posted 07-24-2009 6:56 AM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by ochaye, posted 07-24-2009 1:57 PM jaywill has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024