Questions of Reliability and/or Authorship

Reply to post 210 by bertot:

quote:

---

AM wrote: If I am hearing you correctly, you are saying that what is written in Mark 16:15 thru 18 was not meant for anyone but the Apostles of that time? If that is what you are saying then I need some clarification regarding Mark 16:15 that describes Jesus/God saying:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (KJV)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is not what follows in Mark 16:16 thru 18 the “gospel” or part of the “gospel” to be “preached”?

---

What? Nowhere in the New Testament do we see the idea that “preaching the Gospel” would cease? So your God/Jesus did not say, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature”, because you do not find in the rest of the NT the idea that “preaching the Gospel” would cease?That does not make any practical, reasonable, or logical sense!Furthermore, in Matthew 24:14 your God/Jesus states:

quote:

---

“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” (KJV)

---

According to the above quote the gospel of the kingdom will no longer be preached at the time all nations have heard it, and when that occurs “shall the end come.” Is that not a NT declaration conveying the idea that “preaching the Gospel” would cease? Where in the Four Gospels does Jesus Christ state that “the gifts of the spirit administered through men would eventually fade?If I am hearing you correctly, you are essentially saying that what God/Jesus says to the Apostles in the Gospels was only for the Apostles. So, in John 14:14 & 15, when God/Jesus says:

quote:

---

If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If you love me, keep my commandments” (KJV)

---

He is only saying these things to His Apostles? And because God/Jesus was only saying these things to His Apostles, God/Jesus picked Paul to let the rest of humanity know what was actually going to go on?Frankly, that does not make any sense. And yes, there are question marks { ? } at the end of the above sentences. Respond to the above with some kind of answer. If what God/Jesus states above in the Gospel of John 14:14 & 15 was intended for everyone who would hear and eventually read the Four Gospels of Jesus Christ, and was not just intended for His Apostles, then it does not appear as though God did choose “to have us presently without this type of confirmation. And I doubt seriously that if indeed anything asked in Jesus Christ’s/God’s name was actually done by Jesus Christ/God, very few people “would still find ways to not believe.” They would not only “believe” they would in fact know by personal and collective experience. I personally would become not only a “believer”, but a “knower” in an instant. Who are “they” who are blessed because “they” have not seen, yet have believed? What are you saying here? We - signifying those of us who came into being after Rome conquered Europe - do not get to have the “Spirit of Truth” and/or the “Holy Ghost”, and/or the “Comforter”? We get to “consider our surroundings” {whatever that means? You are not into Natural Proverbs}; we get His written Word {even though Paul’s written word is actually more to the point}; and we get “history and archeology” {two science-based human-oriented pursuits of relatively recent vintage). And your belief and faith in supernatural miracles is based on these as well as, etc, etc, etc?I sense that your “faith” is pretty close to being “blind” here, my friend.But, I am probably quite wrong here. It’s OK. I’m used to it. I am not trying to say that “Absolute Proof” is required for you or myself. If you like the Adam & Eve story the way it is, even with its many obvious riddle and metaphorical features, then by all means: Adam sinned against God, so God condemned all successive generations of humanity to mortal death. But love, hope, and faith will set things right if only we listen to Paul. Jesus will come back, He will damn all of sinners & non-believers, and the righteous will inherit a new world and a new heaven.Extrapolation and conjecture regarding natural metaphors is considerably different than faith in supernatural miracles that have no basis in natural reality.

quote:

---

AM wrote: I need to add one more thing: According to my understanding, what God/Jesus is saying in Mark 16:15 thru 18 was said before Paul was converted. Therefore, whatever Paul might have to say, Paul's writings were not part of the "gospel" that God/Jesus is referring to in Mark 16:15. Is that correct?

---

I am pretty sure that when the question is asked, “Is that correct?”, after a contemplative statement is made, the contemplative statement is to be responded to with an answer of, “Yes it is correct”, or, “No it is not correct.” That is what Paul says. Jesus Christ made no mention of Paul in the Four Gospels that I can find. Therefore, the chronological order of events would be that what is stated as “Gospel” in the Four Gospels was stated prior to Paul being “commissioned by Jesus Christ.” I will follow this contemplative statement with another question, “Does this seemingly obvious chronological order of events conform to the events being discussed?I’ve got to get some sleep.All the best,
Ger

AM thanks for your recent response in post 211 and this is a perfect example of what Iwas saying in post 207, it is fraught with complete misunderstanding of doctrine and scriptural unity and the such like.I have got to work to day and will be happy to respond to it this evening, for it has much to be corrected scripturally and logicallyThanks againD BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

bertot wrote regarding AM’s post #211: Post #211 is “fraught with complete misunderstanding of doctrine”?I can hardly wait to hear which church “doctrine” you happen to be referring to. Since the Reformation there are just so many to choose from.Post #211 is “fraught with complete misunderstanding of “scriptural unity”?And then you mention something about post #211 having Logically speaking then, let’s try to stay away from altering the chronological order of events and quotations. That is to say, the Four Gospel accounts of what Jesus said and did occurred before Saul of Tarsus became Paul the Christian.I look forward to your response.All the best,
Ger

Thanks for your last two mostly sarcastic responses, in turn I would like to say, I sure hope you are playing the "dumb" card in your trying to convince me that you do not understand what I am saying in the above quote. If you are not then I think we have bigger problems than I imagined. The Gospel message would continue until the end of time, the "spiritual gifts", would cease, fade and vanish, 1Cor 13. Really AM, I dont think anyone could not understand that simple principle or statement. If however, you need further explanation, I will be happy to provide it.1Cor13:
1.If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
2.If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
3.If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.
4.Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
5.It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
6.Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.
7.It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8.Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.
9.For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
10.but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.
11.When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.
12.Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13.And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.[/qs]In verse 9 the Apostle uses two examples (synecdoche) of spiritual gifts, to represent all of them. In verse 10 he clarifies between the two and shows what would remain. The Word of God teaches us how to have perfect love and that is that which would remain and our means of understanding it.Here is another passage that is akin to 1Cor., Ephesians 4:1-161.As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received.
2.Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love.
3.Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.
4.There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to one hope when you were called--
5.one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6.one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
7.But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it.
8.This is why it says: "When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men."
9.(What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions ?
10.He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.)
11.It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers,
12.to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up
13.until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
14.Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.
15.Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.
16.From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.In these passages (8-14)the Apostle is pointing out that Christ after his ascension, gave (the Church) specific "gifts", to men, some Apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some teachers, for the perfecing of the body, until we reach the "unity of the Faith". This passage is nearly paralell to 1Cor 13., where the Apostle tells us that these "gifts" would fade, cease and vanish.Now the gifts here under consideration are miraculous in nature, if we follow the context of chapter 12 of 1Cor straight into chapter thirteen. In Ehesians the Apostle through "inspiration" of the Holy Spirit, informs us that the purpose of these gifts was to "build up the Chruch" "until", we come into the "unity of the Faith" in the full knowledge of Christ to attain maturity (the complete, perfect word of God, accomplishes this task,1Tim 3:16-17). And the further purpose of the "unity of the Faith", would keep the church from being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine and cunning craftiness of men, in thier decietful scheming. The Word of God accomplishes this task. Knowledge through the medium of the gifts faded and it was transfered to a written document through inspiration of the Holy Spirit.The unity of the faith in this passage cannot refer to everyone understanding things correctly and in perfect harmony, for this has not and will not happen. It is not refering to Heaven, because it is to happen while (during) a time when winds of false docrine are still presen and to prevent the cunning craftiness of men from preverting the Church. The unity of the faith in Ephesians 4, no doubt refers to the completed, perfect Word of God. As the books of the NT came into existence, several of them existed simaltaneously with the spiritual gifts. For a time the gifts and the written word were together along with verbal and oral tradition. As the Apostles and individuals that had had the Apostles hands laid on them died, so went the gifts with them. As the books were authored and completed they took the place of the gifts as a medium of Gods word. No this verse says just the opposite of what you are conveying. It is saying that it will be preached unto "all" the world. Now since people are growing daily and coming into the age of accountability daily, it remains to and needs to be preached daily and until such time God himself deems it necessary to intervine again. The expression, "all the world" does not have to have a geographic interprtation as much as it does a human perspective. It will be a witness to the"nations" (people AM.)The Biblical pattern has always been that God would change things when man became so corrupt that there was no more reason to continue with thier presence. Since there are clearly still good people accomplishing his will, it seems as though "the end" "may" be postponed.However, I could be wrong here on this point and there could be other reasons that will motivate him to return sooner. But this seems to be the way it has culminated in his Word, Noah, Sodom and Cananan, etc. Am everything does not have to happen at once in an organization. If we look at the the Gospel, Church and its people in this manner,maybe this will help you to understand what we are saying. that is if you are not playing the dumb card here.Christ is the CEO, he sets the rules for the group. At present there were certain members, Peter, John and Matthew, etc. Later on someone else joins, say, Paul. Christ makes contact with this member of the buisness and gives him instructions to carry out that are different from the others. Now as a member he has full priveledges and rights to speak on behalf of the CEO. He elaborates on the things the CEO has said at an earlier date, per the instructions (inspiration of the Holy Spirit, John 16:13) of the CEO.Come on AM do I really need to do this? I never said anything about this only being spoken to the Apostles or only for them, your statement above makes no sense and warrents no response. Christ spoke and taught mutitudes of people, that does not mean that how we and they got that info had to stay the same. Would you really AM, or would you find a way to explain it away as the Pharisees did or accuse him of being possessed, drunk or ignorant. You dont even believe one tenth of the doctrines in the scriptures, would you really believe someone that was raised from the dead, or would you say, well he was never dead in the first place, that cant be the same person or that is a look alike, etc, etc, etc."They have Moses and the prophets, if they will not belive them, they will not believe one raised from the dead". Anyone who never saw Christ or his life and yet believes. You have a unique way of approaching "evidence". If it is your positon you set aside any doubt and assume no faith is required, as if your positions on God, God being a spirit (your statement), the Spirit world, what happens to life before and after death (it goes back to God) ( your statement again), the Eden narrative, your application of the physical to the eternal, your comparison of the physical to the eternaland all of these things as if they are FOREGONE CONCLUSIONS. What exacally does "reality" do to remove your positions from the category of Faith or blind Faith. I maintain that if any portion of your positions can be considered less than "Blind", I can present the evidence to demonstrate my position more than blind as well, what do you say?Yesterday AM said: Today AM said: Hmmmmmm.Bertot writes: What is stated in Pauls letters is a repeat at times and an extention at others through inspiration of the Holy Spirit sanctioned by thorough and directly from Christ. How did you learn of Pauls conversion?To the question you asked I must say, whaaaaaat? You aint kidding loser McphersonD BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

bertot:this is what you wrote in post #210: According to Paul - who came after Jesus in the flesh - the Spiritual Gifts which Jesus talked about would cease, and everyone who comes after that time will be left with “Paul’s word” and what words of Jesus that do not pertain to “Spiritual Gifts.”That is what I am hearing you say.Now isn’t that convenient.You must take Paul’s word for it when Paul claims that the resurrected Jesus {a.k.a. God, Holy Ghost, Holy Spirit} personally contacted him. You must take Paul’s word for it when Paul claim that through the power of the Holy Spirit anything Jesus previously said regarding “Spiritual Gifts” was to eventually be ignored because Paul claims that the Holy Spirit told him that such “Spiritual Gifts” would eventually cease. And you must take Paul’s word for it that Paul’s word trumps “The Word’s” word even though Jesus, when in the flesh, said that the heavens and the earth will pass away but His Word(s) shall never pass away. And then you quote Paul: My question is, How can “the Gospel message” continue if only a part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is valid?Somebody is feeding you a line. Someone is not giving you the truth. If only part of “the Gospel message” is valid then “the Gospel message” is corrupted. What you are left with is a partial Gospel message and a complete message from Paul. If that is good enough for you that is fine, but it is not good enough for me. I do not trust, believe, or have faith in Paul. No “dumb card” is being played. You, according to Paul, are stating that large parts of “the Gospel Message” issued by Jesus Christ no longer apply. Yet Jesus Christ never said anything of the kind. Jesus Christ said:

quote:

---

“Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature”,

---

Jesus Christ made this and other statements similar to it prior to Saul of Tarsus becoming the would-be Paul the Christian.I am not being maliciously sarcastic in any of my responses. It is apparently quite difficult to reply to a number of these subjects without sounding somewhat sarcastic. I am merely trying to respond as openly and honestly as I possibly can.I think we do “have a bigger problem than imagined”! But, it is not that I am stupid {well I am not the sharpest tack in the drawer} it is that what you are calling “the Gospel message” is not the Gospel Message that Jesus Christ issued.Do you see what I have been trying to convey?Where in the Four Gospels does Jesus Christ say that the “Spiritual Gifts” to which He refers will “fade, cease, and/or vanish”?I’ve got to get to work, my friend.All the best,
Ger

You are not listening and paid nearly no attention to the lengthy post and its arguments I made, this is obvious. In John 16:13 Christ said before his departure, "I will not leave you comfortless, howbeit, when he the Spirit of Truth is come, He will guide you into "ALL" truth and show you things to come"Now this implies that All truth had not been revealed as God had seen fit and the rest of the information would come at a later date. The Gospel does not have to be all in one place or time for it to be the truth of God or the Gospel.My guess is that you are being obstinate, unless you would like to respond to the above verse. We have been over this 100 times now AM, the evidence does not consist of Just Pauls words. You are being deliberatley evasive.
My question is, How can “the Gospel message” continue if only a part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is valid? Then have faith in the evidence that supports the word of God if you do not like Paul.The Gospel message primarily is the death, burial and ressurection of Jesus Christ, this is the core of the Gospel and its heart, that believing Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Both the Gospels and Pauls letters affirm this fact. "I determined not to know anything amoung you except JesusChrist and him crucified". Now this is not to say that other divine truth was not coming from the Holy Spirit until it was complete.All of the Gospel message is valid, but this does not mean that how and what God does over the years and his method has to always be the same. Read Heb 1:1 Yes he did, in John 16:13 and then in the rest of the inspired documents and other writings of the inspired men. No truth changed AM, just the method of transmission. In other words I have all the spiritual knowledge that the early Churh did, it simply in a Book now instead of being transmitted to us from the medium of the gifts. In the passages I have given you, deal with them (John16:13).
You have NOT touched the argument that Paul was commisioned by Christ to fulfill the rest of the mission and communicate the rest of the truth to the Gentiles, the Church and the world.If John 16:13 is truth and Paul was an Apostle, it Christs words through Paul and the other Apostles.1Peter1:
10.Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care,
11.trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.
12.It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.Here it is again from another Apostle after Christ's acension. I see you ignoring my very specific arguments and passages offered to demonstrate that because the Gospel was preached a certain way at one time all of its exact parts have to remain exacally the same for the the truth not to be therein still contained there. This is ludicrous. I have no less the knowledge than the early church did, its simply revealed to me in a different way. Whats the problem?What knowledge am I lacking if it is revealed through gifts or a book, if the book, its witnesses and its testimonies and it accuracy is reliable. There is nothing lacking in the Gospel message we have that they had, its simply that after the ascension more and specific information was revealed about certain facts or information that was not specifically delt with by Christ on all topics. Heck, look at Pauls discourses on marriage, virgins, widows, etc, etc, etc.When the woman reached out to touch Jesus in the crowd he said this would be preached as a part of the Gospel, wherever it goes. So I was not there to see this first hand, so what, is it less true because of that point?Part of your problem is in understanding what the "Gospel" is or is not. The Gospel is the good news of Jesus Christ and those things that surround those specific events. Now its ok to call the rest of his words Gospel because all of these things are symbiotic in nature, however, nowhere is it stated that God is required to always do things exacally the same all the time.Going to work again, will get to any responses you have laterD Bertot Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Paul reached the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel."To me, less than the least of all saints, was this grace given to announce to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel" Eph. 3:8) Preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel correspods very much to Christ's teaching in John 15. He is the true vine and the disciples are the branches. Without Him they can do nothing. That is nothing worthwhile to God's eternal purpose.All the riches of the divine life are available to the disciples who abide in Christ as branches abide in the vine. Situations and circumstances will change drastically. But the believers will always have sufficiency by remaining in close fellowship with Him. That is abiding in Him.All the unsearchable and inexhaustible riches of Christ's life to those who abide in Him is the gospel.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

bertot I am listening, I did pay attention, and I am not being intentionally obstinate.I am being sincerely persistent in my attempt to have you address the issues that I am placing in front of you.The word’s of Jesus Christ convey His promise, His parables, and His commandments.In John 16:13 Jesus Christ did not say that the Spirit of Truth was going to nullify any of Jesus Christ’s previous words, promises, parables or commandments.This is what Jesus Christ proclaims regarding His “words” in the Gospel of Mark 13:31:

quote:

---

“Heaven and earth shall pass away; but my words shall not pass away” (KJV)

---

This is a promise made by Jesus Christ according to the Gospel of Mark 16:16 thru 18:

quote:

---

“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; I my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sink, and they shall recover” (KJV)

---

This is what the Gospel of Mark 4:2 & 30 proclaims regarding Jesus Christ’s “parables/
proverbs”:

quote:

---

And he taught them many things by parables, and said unto them in his doctrine. 30: And he said, “Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or which comparison shall we compare it?” (KJV)

---

The proverb that follows employs a grain of mustard seed, and birds that find lodging in the great herb’s branches.In the Gospel of John 14:15 Jesus Christ say this regarding His “commandments”:

quote:

---

“If ye love me, keep my commandments” (KJV)

---

In Mark 13:5 & 6 Jesus Christ states:

quote:

---

“Take heed lest any deceive you; for many shall come in my name, saying, I am; and shall deceive many”

---

If Paul alters any of these “words” either Paul or Jesus was a liar. Paul, not Jesus, states in 1st Cor. 13 that the Spiritual Gifts as described in Mark 16 will cease.How is that not Paul altering Jesus Christ Gospel?I am very tired and need to get some sleep. I hope I have made a somewhat coherent argument.Again, you quoted the Gospel of John 16:13 regarding the spirit of truth. The spirit of truth is to add more to what Jesus has already said, not nullify anything that was Jesus Christ’s words before.I am not done replying to either one of your previous posts. I just am unable to reply to them all at once. Thanks for your patience.All the best,
Ger

And he did not say that somethings would not change in there methods or applications, eitherI dont know how I could make this any simpler than I have, I have done it logically from the example of the buisness world and I have explained it from the scriptures.In debate AM it is ones responsibilty to respond to the direct arguments being made. In this instance it would be your responsibility to demonstrate that Paul was not commissioned, appointed and chosen by Christ as the scriptures clearly indicate.Secondly, it would be your task to demonstrate that John 16:13 does not mean that what the Apostles spoke in later epistles could and should not be considered Christs own words and by his authority, Christ is the one who gave them this authority, correct? Pay close attention to verse 10, it is the exact statement in John 16:13.AM simply repeating over and over that Christ did not speak of the end or alterations of things, is not answering the argument. You would need to demonstrate why these Apostles afterwards did not speak on Christs behalf as Christ clearly indicated they would.In many instances the Apostles amplified or altered due to time and limitations doctrines or ideas as the Holy Spirit saw fit to accomplish his tasks.1Cor7: Pay close attention to verse ten again. Here is an example of where the Apostle exercised his right and authority to amplify a teaching, something Christ had not directly addressed. yet Paul acknowledges that it is God who is actually speaking here by the Holy Spirit.Here it is again from the Apostle John. Pay close attention to verses 18 and 19. Write what you have seen, WHAT IS NOW AND WHAT WILL TAKE PLACE LATER. These things were not mentioned in his earthly ministry, yet he wants them KNOWN now and later. To alter through permission and authority is not nullifiying anything. your task is to demonstrate from scripture that I am wrong about them having been given this right. Yes it is true the Apostles altered by time and methods and circumstances some doctrines, but it was not them doing this but Christ himeself as I pointed out in the quotes from 1Cor 7 and Rev 2. Remember these words AM,"and whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven and whatsoever you loose on earth will be losed in Heaven"Sounds like they had no little authority to speak by, through and from Christ's authority. Altering or modifying is not equivolent to nulification. What kind of "sinks" did they have back then for them to lay there hands on?D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

bertot: Change in the sense of being enhanced by the “spirit of truth”. Not change in the sense of being diminished or disregarded. You have made it simple, but your faith and your logic are naturally incongruent. As yet you have not been able to make you case from the scriptures. Paul’s portion of the scriptures indicates in an uncorroborated fashion that a supernatural event supposedly took place between Paul and Jesus Christ after Jesus’ resurrection. One must take Paul’s word that such a supernatural event ever occurred. I do not trust Paul’s word, or Paul’s instruction. Jesus said many things prior to his crucifixion and Paul rarely if ever mentions Jesus’ words, that according to Jesus himself, will be forever. I find that lack of spreading the gospel that Jesus spoke of many times quite disconcerting.In Matthew 18:18 thru 20 Jesus Christ states some really wonderful gifts. I will just quote Matt. 18:20

quote:

---

“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (KJV)

---

Why would anyone need Paul? If one takes Jesus at his word, wherever two or more people are gathered in his name - {transliterated: yehoshu’a = yhwh is salvation - I am {I am that I am} in the midst of them.Then in Matthew 18:23 thru 35 Jesus Christ speaks of the kingdom of heaven as being like a certain king who takes account of his servants. I will just quote Matt. 18:35

quote:

---

“So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses” (KJV)

---

In Matthew 12:50 and Mark 3:35 Jesus Christ said:

quote:

---

“For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, sister, and mother” (KJV)

---

Yet Paul states:

quote:

---

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

---

According to Paul a woman who does the will of the Father that is in heaven is not treated like Jesus Christ’s sister or mother, but rather as the slave to men and/or her husband. That is not what Jesus said in Matt. 12:50 or Mk. 3:35.And in 1st Timothy 2:11 thru 15 Paul also states:

quote:

---

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. (KJV)

---

According to Paul women in general are to be treated as deceivers and those who brought on the first transgression. Regardless if they do the will of the Father that is in heaven women are not to be treated as part of Jesus Christ’s family, as sisters and mothers, but are to be silent with all subjection. That is not what Jesus taught.While talking to the woman of Samaria at a well, in John 4:13, 14 & 21 thru 24, Jesus Christ said:

quote:

---

Whosoever dirnketh of this water shall thirst again. But whosover drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. 21. Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, whorship the Father. 22. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 23. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24. God is a Spirit; and they that worship him must worship in spirit and in truth. (KJV)

---

In John 14:21 & 23 Jesus Christ states:

quote:

---

“He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he htat loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. 23. If a man love me, he will keep my words; and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him” (KJV)

---

In the above quotes Jesus says, “Keep my commandments” and “Keep my words.” To “keep” something one must already possess it. The Comforter/Holy Ghost or Spirit of Truth will add to what Jesus Christ has shared before his crucifixion, but there is no indication that they will diminish or nullify anything Jesus Christ conveyed while he was in the flesh.If anything the Apostles spoke in later epistles ignores, diminishes, or nullifies what Jesus Christ previously conveyed - as Paul has done regarding “spiritual gifts” and regarding “women who worship the Father” - then their testimony is highly suspect.I am quite certain that you must disagree with what I am sharing with you. I fully understand. Down the road, long after we are no longer talking over the Internet, it is my hope you will give it all some serious thought.Jesus did tell the woman of Samaria that “salvation is of the Jews!” Salvation is of the Jews! Not the Greeks, not the Romans, but the Jews.I have got to get some sleep. I’ll respond to the rest of your most recent post as well as those before it in the morning. I haven’t forgotten them.All the best,
Ger

There is nothing wrong with diminished or disregarded if God sees fit for it to such. The Old covenant was replaced with the New because it had fulfilled its purposes. The gifts throught men vanished because they had served thier funtion and were replaced with another method. You are trying way to hard to discredit a simple principle. You have got to be kidding me. If the following were the only passage it would be the only one I need to demonstrate this point, yet I have provided you with numerous others that you refuse to touch."whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven"Your simple task form scrupture would be to demonstrate this did not happen and that they were not given this authority through the Holy Spirit. No amount of passages of what Jesus said or did will refute this fact. This is an odd statement. Its almost as if you believe Jesus' words as truth and reject Paul's. Since I know you do not believe anything Jesus said, due to the fact that you have said he wrote nothing down, therefore it cannot be trusted, why should we trust him or Paul, why would Jesus' words be anymore corroborated than Pauls, this makes no sense as an argument.Most of the following qoutes from Jesus I agree with but they have nothing to dowith the topic at hand and wehther the Apostles were authorized to speal on Christ's behalf. You have deliberatley ignored all the fine things Paul has said about women in his epistles and you have extracted a few that have nothing to do with thier nature, character and place in society. Pauls instructions in these instances have to with thier place in worship and these instructions come directly fromthe Holy Spirit himself, as has been argued and demonstrated in this post."Husbands love you wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it""Husbands love you wives as you would love youself", etc, etc, etc.The New Testament and specifacally Pauls letters elavate the status of women greater than any society of that day would even consider. This is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts in scripture, not worthy of a reply. Jesus made it claer that those that "do the will of his father in heaven" are his brother and sisters. Gods plan and station for men and women in society have nothing to do with thier spiritual standing before God, all are equal in Gods eyes depending on thier service to him.Jesus never indicated that women should NOT be silent and in subjection. He was simply trying to remove them from the degrading status that MAN and SCOCIETY had placed them in, one of slavery. Part of what Jesus shared before the crucifixtion is that the Apostles would have authority to loose and bind and I have already demonstrated from scripture that this meant not only more or less but to radify and nulify as in the case of 1Cor13. If you will keep in mind AM, I am not saying that the Apostles nulified any "spiritual truths" or things of this nature but things that changed in "method" or "purpose", there is a vast difference.The "gifts" that the spirit gave are still here, how we recieve those gifts of knowledge, patience , understanding, blessings, etc, etc have change from the method we recieve them. Healing does not come from the laying on of a mans hands by a miraculous means anymore, but directly from God. I am only speaking of methods and methodology.All of the scriptures you qoute are truth and I agree with them, you are simply missing the point. It is true that no spiritual truth that Jesus spoke was nulified. To change a physical method of application is not to change its truth or value. We dont worship God in a temple anymore but in our hearts, minds and spirits (John4:24). In other words we are not required to make animal sacrifieces as a part the Spiritual. And my intention here is not to imply they did not worship in spirit but that we are not requires to sacrifice animals, the method changed. Again, it almost sounds as if you believe Jesus, heart, mind and soul. Do you think he actually said these things and that they are to be believed. If you do not, you should be able to see the immediate contradiction in your argument. If we cannot believe one why should we believe the other, this makes no sense. But this is the least of your problem in establishing this line of reasoning as my arguments above indicate.AM wwe can take a break if this is starting to ware you out, we can go at our own pace, it seems as others have lost interest here, justlet me know.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

bertot wrote: I am enjoying my conversations with you and the others a great deal. My fence repair job has physically beaten the crud out of me, but conversing with you is a great and honorable pleasure. As far as I know I will never loose interest in the subjects we are discussing.I’ll respond to what you have posted and you can reply at whatever pace you feel is comfortable. Thanks again for sharing your insights and points of view. I cherish every word you convey whether we are in agreement or not. Well, that certainly leaves the door wide open to abuses. I wonder how many “New Covenants” we are talking about? Yea, that must be it. Now, why would anyone want to discredit such a simple principle? God so loved the world that He allowed His only begotten Son to be murdered by a bunch of ignorant sots, and then left the world with a book that describes a New Covenant created by His Only Begotten Son that is then altered by The Holy Ghost and Paul. That’s simple. And then God joined these New Covenants to the Old Covenant that once belonged to the Jews - who don’t believe in the New Covenants - so we can get a really confusing picture of everything that we need to have faith in.But that’s God’s plan, right? All we have to do is accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior and we are doing just all right, right?How simple can it be? It is not that I “refuse to touch” the numerous passages you have provided, it is that I quite often get overwhelmed by the numerous passages you cite and am unable to sit at the computer long enough to get around to them all.I really want to respond to everything you write! I will try to go back and find the passages you have provided that I have missed and respond to them, or you can tell me the post number that I did not respond to adequately and I will do my best to respond to it. Please explain in a little more depth, I do not follow what you are saying by quoting this passage. How do you get “fact” out of what you state in the sentence before your use of the word “fact”? The Holy Spirit as described in the New Testament is not a “fact” it is a “faith-based concept.If my “simple task from scripture” is to demonstrate this did not happen according to scripture, but you claim that “no amount of passages of what Jesus said or did” according to scripture will convince you that you are being faithfully mislead, then I guess that is that.You deny that the Hebrew Eden Narrative may well be a “parable”, and you will not accept any passages from the so called, “spurious,” Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, so it appears as though your faith is complete and there is nothing I can say to refute the authority Paul has claimed through the Holy Spirit. You are wonderfully gullible, my friend.That which constitutes the false accuser is probably delighted. The following statement is not “odd” at all. I am quoting Scripture. I do not have to “believe Jesus’ words” when whoever is supposedly quoting him quotes him as stating verifiable, confirmable, supportable truth, facts, and/or reality. How I comprehend the functions of the Hebrew, Greek, and English languages, truth, facts, and/or reality do not require me to “believe”. Paul’s assertions and comments do not conform to the “gospel” - words, promises, commandments, and parables - authors of the Four Gospels have quoted Jesus as saying. I am quoting Scripture. I believe that which is believable. The author’s of the Four Gospels describe Jesus saying certain things that are quite believable, and more than merely believable, certain things they quote Jesus as saying make perfect, logical, reasonable and rational sense. These are generally the “sayings of Jesus” which I quote from the Four Gospels. Paul’s assertions and comments do not conform to the “gospel” - words, promises, commandments, and parables - authors of the Four Gospels have quoted Jesus as saying.Now, how does that “make no sense as an argument”? I know you meant to write “speak on Christ’s behalf”, but I think spiel is a delightful phonetic slip of the tongue.If you actually believe that “The Spirit of Truth” - the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost - who would supposedly be Jesus and the Father, would alter His/Their New Covenant in the manner in which Paul clearly alters it, then you are welcome to the New Covenant according to Paul. Woman’s “nature, character and place in society” are all determined by religion, “their place in worship”! Here are some of the “etc’s” you neglected to mention:Ephesians 5:22 thru 24

quote:

---

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church; and he is the saviour of the body. 24. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. (KJV)

---

Colossians 3:18

quote:

---

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. (KJV)

---

See how the “place of worship” tends to affect the “nature, character and place in society” for “women”? Read Ephesians 5:22 thru 24 and Colossians 3:18 above and make this statement again. You might ask your wife how she “truly” feels about this elevated status.

quote:

---

AM wrote: According to Paul women in general are to be treated as deceivers and those who brought on the first transgression. Regardless if they do the will of the Father that is in heaven women are not to be treated as part of Jesus Christ’s family, as sisters and mothers, but are to be silent with all subjection. That is not what Jesus taught.

---

Is it really??? Read Ephesians 5:22 thru 24 and Colossians 3:18 above! Now, let’s read where the Gospel of Paul justifies his so called “elevated status of women” in 1st Timothy 2:13 & 14

quote:

---

For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. (KJV)

---

Jesus was not just talking about woman’s “spiritual standing before God,” but woman’s physical, mental, corporeal, and temporal standing also. Read the Gospel as preached by Jesus of Nazareth and the context is quite clear. Actually he did, not in those words, but in words like “Judge not” and “he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much”. Having women not be silent and in subjection {to bring under domination, control, or influence} is removing “them from the degrading status that Man and Society placed them in”: Read Paul in Ephesians 5:22 thru 24 and Colossians 3:18 above! Now there’s the kind of comments by Paul that essentially put women in the status “of slavery”. If that’s what you believe. If that’s what you believe. Certain things that are said by anyone do not necessarily require “Faith” or “Belief” in the individual who is saying them; the comments, saying, or whatever, just simply stand on their own. The “words” speak for themselves. Jesus of Nazareth may well have said many of the things that the Four Gospel writers say he did. If the “words” speak for themselves then it really does not matter who said them. When I quote “Scripture” and “Scripture” states that Jesus said this or that that is how I quote “Scripture”. As far as I know that is the only accurate way to quote a source. Again, if what someone says “speaks for itself” {i.e. makes logical, reasonable, rational sense} then “belief” in the “person” is less important than the message they are conveying. To most if not all Pauline Christians “the messenger” is the most important part of the gospel message. To me the message conveyed is what is most important. Jesus could have been depicted as having said nothing and simply performed some miracles, and then died for the sins of humanity. However, the Four Gospel writers depicted Jesus of Nazareth as having quite a lot to say, and I suspect there is a good reason for these writers to have shared the New Covenant Gospel Message in this fashion. We will see, my friend.I have spent almost four hours compiling and writing this response to this post of yours. I do not always have this kind of time to spend in this fashion. It is not that I choose not to reply to everything your posts. Sometimes it’s just that I do not have time to respond completely, so I respond in part, and then one post takes over and another post is left behind.I do hope you understand.All the best,
Ger

Why, when God is in charge. I suppose you god cannot accomplish these simple tasks One that can be forceably and accurately demonstrated. I would have to see the others you are refering to, or are they a part of your other imaginary stuff. Hey, let me ask you a question, where did you get all of the above facts from, all of your above discourse must have come from somewhere and I am going to bet it was from the "scriptures", that book we are talking about. Now you are on the right track, you know the one that tells you that God is a Spirit, unless you learned this from some other source. Maybe you could provide me with a source of how you know that which leaves the body goes back to God, oh thats right you have no source outside the scriptures, other than you imagination. You still dont have this logic thing down yet do you ole buddy.If you you can take the time to explain what you did above, even in sarcasm its very simple isnt it AM. You are right he could not have made it any simpler than to put it on paper, then back it up with facts. What does it mean when Christ says to his Apostles, "whatsoever you bind and lose will be written in heaven and earth", etc, etc, etcI dont see how it could be much simpler, do you? Take a stab at this very "difficult" passage and see what you come up with AM. We can get you some assistance if you need it, perhaps an seventh grade Bible student could help you. You still dont have this argumentation thing down do you? When we are discussing scripture for scripture I am assuming that what you qoute you atleast for the sake of the argument believe it to be true in that moment to compare it somewhere else in scripture, if you want to discuss the Holy Spirit being a fact or the authenticity of the scriptures, those are seperate issues and seperate discussions. Do you see how arumentation works AM.When you qoute Jesus for argument purposes to counterwhat Paul said, I am assuming you believe at least for argument sake what Christ said was true at present, if you do not that is another issue. Do you see how argumentation works now AM? Please try and keep the two issues seperate. When we are discussing the Holy Spirit in an argument I am assuming you believe him to be actual for argument sake.My point from scripture was that Christ promised the Apostles guidance from the HS after his departure, true or not AM?No you need to qoute verses from Jesus to which indicate that the Apostles would not recieve guidance and ones that show that alteration and nulification are not possible. Quoting random general scriptures about believing Jesus and his words do not demonstrate your point. "Deny" and "may very well be" are nonsensical terms applied together, one is absolute while the other is speculative.If you could reproduce the gnostic gospels in nearly thier entirity in the writings of the those that were contemporary with the Apotles and shortly thereafter, like you can the NT, the Gospel of Thomas may lend some credibility. The reason my simple friend that these books are almost nonexsitent in those wrtings is that they knew what the correct and authoratative ones were. When you are in time close to facts AM, there is no need to keep defending the obvious. 500 years from now there may be those that question the "signers" of the declaration of Independance, but for now no one really doubts it correct, because we are close to the events.Quoting one of these gnostic Gospels then would be like quoting the National Enquirer today to establish some facts about present day truth, sorry AM, "thats the facts". This is not the point. Thie point is, if you can without quoting random scriptures of Christ show "contradiction" in these alterations, you would have established your case, this you simply cannot do. For example, if you could quote specifically a passage that actually demonstrates what Paul said in 1Cor 13 about the passage and vanishing of miraculous gifts, in Christ's words, demonstrated your point, this simply cannot be done. If you you think I am being obstinate, then quote a specific passage, not a general one about believing what jesus has to say or that his words will never fail, or some such. Really!!!, go hit your wife in the mouth AM and see who responds ,the police or the pastor. A comment as that above in this liberal society makes no logical sense. The statement above has not been true for many many years. The truth is that society dictates what a womens or anybody elses place will be. As God is always supplanted in civilizations and societies eventually, it is hard to recognize any of his influence after a while.Bertot writesYou forgot to quote the rest of the passage in Eph 5, verese 25 thru 33. Did you do this deliberatley? Here is the rest just in case you missed it:Wives and Husbands
5:22-6:9pp -- Col 3:18-4:1
22.Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.
23.For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.
24.Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25.Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her
26.to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word,
27.and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.
28.In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
29.After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church--
30.for we are members of his body.
31."For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh."
32.This is a profound mystery--but I am talking about Christ and the church.
33.However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.Order and structure in God and his creation, imagine that?Question AM, why when you and your wife get in your car to go somewhere why do you drive the car? Is this a simple fact society or a "natural" thing AM, one of respect and understanding of how nature works. Gods order in general in the Chruch is follows a design even as nature has its own design. In Gods plan for those created in his image the stronger (not mentally) serves the weaker ) and takes care of the weaker vessel. In nature the stronger takes advantage of the weaker, yet even in that there is order and structure.Question what part of 1Tim 2:13:14 do you not agree with, which part is not true AM?I know you believe this a new concept advocated by Paul but it not. Remember this passage from Genesis, "and your desire shall be for you husband, yet he shall rule over you", not new AM..If you dont like Gods order find another one, as I suspect you already have. As I suspected, you found no words from Jesus to counter what Paul said but a twisting of Christ words ". What Christ actually said was "judge not according to appearance but "judge" righteous judgement". Now I wonder where correct judgement would come from, maybe Gods own words through inspiration of theHoly Spirit.Silence in the Chrurches is not the same as silent in society, this is Pauls indication, not everywhere. Further, the silence is not to shut you mouth and never say anything but one of subjection to the order God has established. How many women priests and High priest were there in the OT AM.Here is a parallel passage AM. "I suffer not a women to teach nor to usurp authority over the man".. Under consideration here is the Church and teaching in the Church, not society in general.. This does not mean for her to not say a single word in the worship or class, it is simply a observation of the design and order God has built into nature and his Church, for her not to override his authority given by God. It would be the same if I were to speak a false word against an Elder of the Church without witnesses or verification, I would be disrespecting the authority God gave and placed on him. he is my spiritual superior not my human better, see the difference, these things have nothing to do with society in general.More in a minuteD Bertot.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Some interesting passages from Paul on women:1.) "I commend to you Pheobe our sister, who is a deaconess of the church which is in Cenchrea" (Rom. 16:1)This is Paul's first positive recommendation in a long list in Romans 16. Paul was big on service. He commends the example of this sister."That you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints and assist her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been the patroness of many, of myself as well." (v.2)Whatever she needs help her! She is of noble status and separated unto God totally for service to the whole church. Perhaps she allowed the church to meet in her home. A patroness is a protectoress. This denotes one who sustains, helps, supplies. This woman received this noble recommendation because she attained such a model example of service to the church in Cenchrea.2.) "Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in the Lord" (ROm 16:3).It is interesting to me that Paul mentioned the famale name of the wife ahead of the male name of the husband.That they were his fellow workers probably means that they were an apostolic couple an apostolic wife and husband team. They "risked their necks", that is willing to be martyred for the ministry.The wife's name is mentioned first.3.) "Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who were also in the Lord before me." (Rom. 16:7)Some scholars agree that Junia is a female name. If so here we have a woman who was note among the apostles. She had reputation along with Andronicus, among the apostles.You may draw your own conclusions. I think it indicates that perhaps she too was of the status of an apostle. She could not have attained noteworthiness among the apostles for no reason. Paul singles her out with Andronicus as his fellow prisoners. They must have been imprisoned for the ministry.He also recommends that they were experienced with Christ before he was thus showing great respect. I would not doubt if it showed some amount of submission also.4.) "Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother as well as mine." (Rom 16:13)Why would Paul single out this woman as being his mother as well as the mother of Rufus? Probably because she cared for him. She may have prayed fervently for Paul's missionary journeys.Perhaps in the kingdom to come all the work accomplished by the Apostle Paul will be accredited to the faithful prayers of this "mother".Prayers that touch the throne of God are prayers of authority. Prayers from sisters of faith which bind the devil and move the throne of God to act upon the earth are prayers of authority. This is greater authority than having to give a speech to an audience.How do we know? Perhaps all the success of the Apostle Paul will one day be revealed to be because of the fervent prayers of some elderly sister on behalf of God's work on earth.The problem is that people want to concentrate in looking authoritative in the eyes of man. What is really needed is the authoritative faithful prayers that move God's throne on behalf of His will on the earth.I expect to be very surprised in that day as to where the real source of the blessing on God's work was.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

bertot:I do not have a lot of time to spend with this reply. I apologize. I may only be able to respond to the first half of your post #223. I will get to the rest of your post this evening if I can.

quote:

---

AM wrote: Well, that certainly leaves the door wide open to abuses.

---

And then bertot writes: So, God is in charge, but civilizations and societies always eventually supplant God to the point that any of his influence is hard to recognize after a while.God is in charge, but our would-be Free Will always eventually supplants God.No! The God or if you wish “god” - Neither He/he or I care - does not accomplish such simple tasks.

quote:

---

AM wrote: I wonder how many “New Covenants” we are talking about?

---

I perceive at least Two New Covenants. You do not. I see the “New Covenant” established by Jesus of Nazareth in the Four Gospels, and then I see another “New Covenant” established by Saul of Tarsus. You do not.If you will, for me - being the dumb jerk that I am - please “forcibly and accurately demonstrate” how these two literarily established individuals are saying the same thing. I perceive them saying two different gospels.And since you are the one employing literarily described miracles and supernatural events, how is it that when I point to natural phenomena I am the one describing “imaginary stuff”? It seems to me that there is more “imagination” involved in literarily described miracles, supernatural beings, and anthropomorphic ethereal spirits than there is in natural phenomena. I learned that “God is a Spirit” from the English Dictionary, not the Holy Bible. The term “God” is initially defined as “the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the Universe” and then is also defined as “Life, truth, and principle.” The term “spirit” is defined as “an animating being or influence.” In these particular definitions there is nothing anthropomorphic alluded to in either term. If one wishes to anthropomorphize the terms God or Spirit there are definitions that would allow one to do so. I choose not to anthropomorphize either God or Spirit.In post #169 I gave these sources:

quote:

---

AM wrote: Some come from the Dead Sea Scrolls, some from the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, some from Chief Seattle’s 1855 speech, some from Black Elk Speaks, some from Joseph Campbell’s, Transformations of Myth Through Time, some from Alexander Marshak’s, The Roots of Civilization, as well as many other sources.

---

quote:

---

AM wrote: Yea, that must be it. Now, why would anyone want to discredit such a simple principle? God so loved the world that He allowed His only begotten Son to be murdered by a bunch of ignorant sots, and then left the world with a book that describes a New Covenant created by His Only Begotten Son that is then altered by The Holy Ghost and Paul. That’s simple. And then God joined these New Covenants to the Old Covenant that once belonged to the Jews - who don’t believe in the New Covenants - so we can get a really confusing picture of everything that we need to have faith in.
But that’s God’s plan, right? All we have to do is accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior and we are doing just all right, right?
How simple can it be?

---

I do not consider anything in the above quote by AM to be “facts”. They are a summation of what I have heard from you and other Pauline Christians. There is nothing “simple” about what I said in the above quote. Furthermore, the New Testament Canon was not established until Roman Emperor Constantine convened the international council of bishops at Nicaea in 325 CE. So much for the simplicity of putting anything “on paper” back in the Roman Empire. And exactly what “facts” are you referring to as backing up the New Testament Canon that was established at Nicaea in 325 CE?

quote:

---

AM wrote: "whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven" Please explain in a little more depth, I do not follow what you are saying by quoting this passage

---

I can read and comprehend the biblical passage, it is what you are saying by quoting it in the context of Paul’s writings that I do not fully grasp. If you happen to know a seventh grade Bible student to help me why don’t you bring him or her in to assist my feeble little mind.So, after Simon Barjona told Jesus of Nazareth that he perceived Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God, Jesus said, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee {Peter} the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (KJV, Matt. 16:15 thru 19).All of this has to do with Simon Barjona, a.k.a. Peter, and nothing to do with Paul. Or am I missing something? And then in Matthew 18 Jesus speaks of being humble as a little child; if thy hand or food offend then cut them off; the Son of man has come to save that which was lost; thy brother shall trespass against thee, {last attempt} tell the church; and then, Matt. 18:18 "whatsoever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, whatsoever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven". Again, what does this have to do with Paul? None of this was even written down until after Paul wrote his Epistles.Furthermore, in Matthew 16 it is Peter {a.k.a. Simon Barjona) who is to be the foundation of Jesus’ church, not Paul {a.k.a. Saul of Tarsus).I’ve got to go and repair fence. I’ll respond more this evening.All the best, my friend,
Ger