The Mother of All Causes: the Father of Lies

elsbet

Star
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,659
I like some of the ideas Mike draws out, perhaps the one big issue I have is that he is a scholar by profession and in some ways a bit of a line voice in the material he covers. As such he is at risk of going out too far on his own and accidentally breaking sound doctrine in order to make things FIT. I love to learn more about things, but I am aware that I don't know it all, and perhaps, as in the case of the seven thunders of Revelation, we are not told it all either!
Lone voice, maybe?

As such he is at risk of going out too far on his own and accidentally breaking sound doctrine in order to make things FIT.

He certainly wouldn't be alone. A lot of people have the compulsion to make things fit-- no matter how hard they have to cram that last puzzle piece into place, by God. I appreciate your generous spirit (I do), but he's still getting the side eye from me.
 






Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
Jesus Dac.
God Bless His name!! SMH

I even admitted that I don't have an answer and explained why I don't need one and you still get upset.
I dont get upset, I just wanted to highlight to everyone that you dont really have any ability to defend your positions because its all based on your subjective, personal opinion and nothing more. In other words, your perspectives arent backed up in Scriptures, and your hypocritical in everything you say about the Word of God, so people ought to take anything you say with heaps of salt...

If the thesis is to be valid, the thesis cannot contradict itself. And as I've shown it does.
No it doesnt you just force things into the narrative and ignore other parts that show your ideology incorrect...

And why should I even mirror anything to Jesus. Are the actions of Moses' desert god not bad enough without having to compare them to the perfect man / real God? A supposedly all-powerful being killing his own subjects who have dragged along behind him in the desert for 40 years, because they complained of hunger they didn't have before in Egypt?
SMH, you cant even seem to fathom anything that was happening, as tho God intended to just drag them around for no reason. Again what did God originally say He was going to do Art?

First He promised to bring them to the Land of Milk and Honey, and unlike your assumptions here, it wasnt 40 years in which they had been in the desert at this point. The fact is they started complaining immediately, and they reached the Promise Land in less than 2 years, one year of actually walking from Egypt to the border of the Promise Land. In this time He provided everything for them, EVERYTHING and what did they do the whole time? Complain complain complain, like how you complain about YHWH even tho He is providing you with everything you see and have.

You refuse to see Israels own Sin and act as tho God is just Evil and mean, you dont think Sin exists or something Art? I mean lets look at Jesus here, what is Jesus going to do when He Returns?

Rev 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

Rev 16usness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.
17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Whose Wrath is this Art? Is it Evil YHWHs? Or is it someone else Wrath that is being doled out?

Rev 6:
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Lets not get it twisted here Art, Jesus is coming and has a cup overflowing with Wrath that is to be poured out upon all who have Sinned, and rejected Him. The Blood will run feet deep in the Streets, it will feed all the birds of the air. Yet you act as tho Jesus and YHWH are different, so how are they different if they both are pouring out Wrath upon Sinners? Talk about Plagues right? What does Jesus pour out on those who Reject Him?

Rev 16:9 And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.

21 And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great.


So what exactly is the difference between Jesus here, pouring out plagues and having men blaspheme His name and complain about the Wrath they are enduring for their Sins, and the plagues and YHWH bringing Wrath against the Israelities who blasphemed His name and constantly complained about everything?

Does Jesus tell us we ought to fear the Father God because we will face Wrath? I dont know does He Art?

Matt 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Matt 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I guess these arent genuine Scriptures because they dont align to your personal made up subjective ideologies and Religion correct?

Facts are Jesus came as a Lamb to save the World from Wrath that is due to OUR Sins and He will come back to merit out that exact Wrath to all those who refuse to look upon Him for Salvation. You just outright refuse to see YHWH as Merciful which He is ALL THE TIME in the Old Testament, and only choose to see His Righteous Judgement, but you see it incorrectly as being Evil. And you also refuse to see the Wrath of Jesus that comes upon Sinners, if you were to actually read and accept the Word of God for what it is, you would see that YWHW pours out Mercy and Grace continually to those who only deserve Wrath for their Sins, and Jesus will bring Wrath, so Jesus and YHWH are the same. The encompass the exact same Traits...

We're gonna read the scripture you've provided together, attentively please, and find out who's misrepresenting it:

Jesus said: "Verily, Verily, I say unto you ..." So far so good, still on the same wave length, I hope? "Moses gave ..." Very important here is the past tense. Well, past tense usage is obvious, but it becomes extremely relevant because of what you should focus on later. Here we go. "Moses gave you not that bread from heaven;" Very interesting. Jesus said the manna they were given by Moses was not from Heaven, even though "God" was with them. "but my Father..." Jesus says "my Father", he doesn't say God just yet to make it clear He's talking about His Father. "but my Father giveth ..." Present tense, not past tense! " ... you the true bread from heaven." Jesus explicitly says that Moses did not (past tense!) give them the bread of heaven. He also explicitly says that His Father is giving them (present tense!) the true bread from Heaven. Nowhere does Jesus say it was His Father who gave them bread in the desert with Moses. Nowhere. You're reading that into it. Next part:

"For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world."

It can't get any clearer than this. The true bread of God (He says God now, to make it clear His Father is God) is not what Moses gave in the desert, it is Himself. The only logical conclusion here is that the manna Moses or his desert god gave was not Jesus.
I already explain the proper interpretation of this passage and what does Jesus quote only seconds later?

John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

So Jesus says it is written in the Prophets and He quotes a Scripture and says that Scripture is about Him and His Father correct? I'll answer for you because you seem incapable of answering correctly when posed with these questions, YES, He is saying this Scripture is about Him and His Father, so what did He quote:

Is 54:13 And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.

What is that word transliterated as LORD? Oh thats right YHWH, so what did Jesus just confirm again a few sentences down? That YHWH is the Father.


There was more here but it got messed up when I went to post it, Ill reply later I am leaving work ATM...
 






Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
You're not making sense.
I am.

It's easy to side with the account of Jahwists and people who believe in Moses against the people that bloody died in the desert.
Interesting, I was studying the Word a bit ago and just happened to come across this one guy who believed in everything Moses wrote, and not only does it relate to this point but also to your prior points you incorrectly made like " All your mumbo jumbo about Jesus being the manna, Jesus feeding the people in the desert, supporting them like a rock, etc it's just not true!"

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?



Humm so who should I believe, you who says Moses wasnt speaking of Jesus, or Jesus that says outright Moses was speaking of Him? You can deny it all you want, it is fine, Im not here to ever change your mind, I cant, but I am here to show to everyone else who reads these threads just how much your ideologies and Religion goes against what Jesus and the Word of God states. Yet again your only possible declaration here is the same tired stand by of well this was tampered with or whatever other method you invent to stave off the cognitive dissonance that surely comes when Jesus tells us that Moses was writing of Him. All I did was relay the fact that Moses was writing of Jesus and that the Old Testament is literally and continually testifying of Jesus!!

I still cant fathom how you can hold that the Old Testament and its God is horrible, when Jesus says its all about Him, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament about Himself continually, when Jesus says He is the literal embodiment of the Old Testament Prophecies? How does the Evil God make Prophcies about Jesus Christ coming and redeeming mankind?

Another verse I happened upon earlier again makes it oh so obvious that YHWH is the Father by Jesus own admission, I would love to know how you can possible hold your viewpoints in light of it other than, dismiss it because it doesnt fit your narrative while hypocritically quoting from the same Book and Chapter when it suits you.

Who is the God of the Temple in Jerusalem Art? Assuredly you must be honest and say that the Temple in Jerusalem is the House of YHWH, it was built for Him specifically correct? Well what does Jesus say?

John 2:
13 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:
15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.
17 And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.

So why is Jesus upset about the Jews doing this in the Temple of Satan by your account? Why does Jesus turn violent against them for doing this? Doesnt make sense if the Temple of YHWH is Satan. And most importantly why does Jesus call the Temple made specifically and only for YHWH His FATHERS HOUSE?

There is also a quote there, where does it come from?

Ps 69:9 For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

Well whos house is it that David is speaking about? And those that reproach who have fallen upon him? Well of course the answer is:

Ps 69:13 But as for me, my prayer is unto thee, O Lord, in an acceptable time: O God, in the multitude of thy mercy hear me, in the truth of thy salvation.

There is that name again, whos house is it? Whos reproaches? YHWH, and Jesus clearly calls YHWH house, His Fathers house, why because YHWH is the Father...

But Jesus spoke of you there Art, if you wont believe in Moses, you surely wont believe in Him...

because Paul's words can be relativised in context of his proselytism.
Lol no, its funny how the most explicit verse you choose to skip over I mean I can quote dozens of text saying the same thing, but you will skip over them because you cant actually address them. Let me ask would YOU ever use the Old Testament Scriptures to qualify Christ to anyone? As in speak positively of them to show that Jesus is God? Surely you wouldnt, you hate the God of the Old Testament, you hate the Old Testament Scriptures, why would you EVER use the OT to qualify Christ, that would be defeating your entire purpose!

But you want to now make the claim that Paul is doing just that? Nonsense, if Paul actually believed in the manner you do he wouldnt spend ENTIRE Chapters speaking positively of the Old Testament Saints, he wouldnt DARE use the Old Testament and its promises from YHWH to Israel to be FULFILLED in Jesus!!! That would be hamstringing himself, that would discredit ever single argument he could make to show that Jesus is Anti-YHWH. You wouldnt do it and to claim Paul is doing that is ludicrous. He does it because he believes and is stating that the God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament...

The image of the beast, would that look something like a serpent? Something like this:
No, I believe that its speaking of the False Prophet there, has nothing to do with what you are trying to imply, but what does Jesus say about Moses and his writings, lets keep focusing on what Jesus declares and not what we declare is that fair?

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?


What does this say other than belief in the Son of Man will grant eternal life, while belief in Moses' serpent was required to not die on the spot? Can the difference not be greater?
Apparently you are incapable of understanding the Spiritual lessons and congruencies between Christ and the Old Testament, its not your fault tho, its only Spiritually Discerned by those who have been Born Again:

1 Cor 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


What I have shown you, you declare is foolishness, but that is because you cant know them because they are spiritually discerned, one day I hope you can come to understand what Jesus declared about Himself, that the Scriptures testify of Him and Moses wrote of Him..

Why yes, that's exactly what it is. Ockham's razor. In fact, it's outright sadistic, instilling people with a disease and then demanding worship to be healed from that disease. This is one the very distinguishing traits of Satan in all old mythologies!
Ugh, incapable of Spiritual discernment, why did the plague come upon them? Oh thats right because they Sinned but still He gives Grace and offers a redemption to them, which again is a foreshadowing of Jesus, which is what Jesus declares Himself but you are too blind to see I suppose.

Tell that to the Israelites.
Ok, hey Israelities, the events you went through are foreshadowing of all people and the Redemption to come thru Christ, the Messiah. Lets not forget Jesus also said this:

John 4:22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

Seems Jesus continually denies your made up Religion you keep trying to force on Him...

And I dedicate a whole chapter to the dimension of Justice and what place it has in the greater moral scheme. Justice is a coverup for good and evil, arbitrarily devised by a lawmaker, not inherently universal and transcendent. Only Good is, but for that you need knowledge of good and evil, which the "god of Justice" prohibited Man to attain, so Man would follow his law.
You mean the Law that speaks of Jesus? The Law Jesus followed? The Law Jesus told the young rich man and everyone else to follow to inherit eternal life? Justice is inherently universal and transcendent, maybe you should read and agree with what Paul says about that?

Rom 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

I mean you are free to make up anything you want concerning Justice and the Law, but Paul wouldnt accept your ideology, Paul out right tells us that God brings Righteous Judgement, and that the Law is universal and transcendent so much so that the Gentiles who didnt have the Law formally given to them, do the Law, why? Because it is written in their hearts and thus they know they are in Sin and inexcusable before God, even tho like you they try to excuse themselves from their Sin and Judgement...

Jesus Himself is the one that will bring all Righteous Judgement upon the World, I already showed you where He does it, none of which really fits with your narrative so I guess even tho you are quoting the Book you will dismiss all of those verses too...

The fact that you and millions of others believe that is exactly the reason why Christianity is in such a bad shape and a tragedy I'm trying to undo.
Lol because Gnosticism is doing so well and has done the world so much good, as opposed to Christianity which has saved billions of people. If Christianity is in a bad shape its not because people believe Jesus and the God of the Old Testament are the same, its because like you they reject massive portions of the Bible that doesnt fit their made up Religions and Ideologies instead of submitting to what the Word says concerning everything in life....

IMO your mission is only to continue to try and destroy True Biblical Christianity, just as Satan has been doing since the beginning of time...

So? Maybe Elias was an actual prophet, but different than the Elias we know from the OT. Maybe he didn't call fire from heaven. Maybe he didn't send she-bears to tear up 42 children just because they mocked him. Maybe those tales of Elias are manufactured by the scribes and Pharisees to instil fear in their subjects; and the OT version you have in your possession is with 100% certainty a Pharisaic product, don't even doubt that fact.
There it is more cognitive dissonance to try and ignore the clear problems with your ideologies and what it means considering Jesus is speaking positively about Elijah. So do you not think Jesus is aware of the Scriptures He is quoting and the Authors He is endorsing? Do you really think the Bible at the time of Christ which Christ quotes verbatim, and the Bible we have now, OT, are different? I think not my dear sir and you know for a fact they are 99% identical, so again your just blowing smoke. The Elijah of the OT is the real Elijah and Jesus endorses him plain and simple.

Maybe there's a hidden meaning in that passage of Matthew. Peter suggests to make 3 tabernacles, but the Father from heaven says "listen to Jesus, in him I am well pleased". What does that mean? Listen to Jesus and not to Moses or Elias? No tabernacles for Moses and Elias? When the disciples throw their face down to the ground and look back up, they only see Jesus. Moses and Elias are gone.
Trust me brother I know exactly what the Spiritual meaning behind that is, and you are close to what it means but your hatred for Moses and Elijah keep you from seeing exactly what it means. The Law and the Prophets can get you so far but Jesus is the one whom we should always keep our eyes upon. The Law and the Prophets were given the SAME Righteous position in glory as Christ, that is what you cant accept or see because the god of this world blinds you to it. However Jesus came fulfilled both as intended and written about in the Law and the Prophets and thus we have Jesus encompassing both the Law and the Prophets in Himself. It definitely doesnt mean not to listen to Moses or Elijah, Jesus already told us they wrote about Him. To not listen to the Law and the Prophets (which btw is what Moses and Elijah Spiritually represent here if I wasnt clear) is to not listen to Jesus....

There are so many mysteries here that neither you or me can provide a definite answer to, and not in the least will we find the answer in that book that has been tampered with by the very people Jesus warned about; the hypocrites and liars, scribes and Pharisees, descendants of Cain himself.
Ugh, Jesus quotes from the same exact text you have today, this is fact...

Another observation, if these people really were tampering with the Bible to the degree you make them out of have done, then it only makes sense they would get rid of EVERYTHING that has to do with Jesus period. They would not leave Scriptures in there that specifically point to Jesus and definitely wouldnt leave in Scriptures that make them out to look stupid and the bad guys 90% of the time. I made this same remark to a guy who used to be on here years ago that was my friend Chainmaker when he was an athiest. He made the same general speculation that the Jews just made up these things and tampered with the Bible. So Art if you were going to out of thin air make up a Religion and a Holy Text, would you continually make yourself and your people out to be whoremongers, backsliders, rebels, blasphemers, haters, ignorant, sinners, ect ect ect? Because if one reads the Bible Israel are those things more often than not. If they were going to edit the Bible, assuredly they would take out all these horrible things about themselves, and definitely wouldnt leave in Scriptures that show Jesus is the Messiah right? Of course they wouldnt leave that stuff, but its in there, why? Because they didnt do what you and him at the time accused them of. If an Atheist can grasp this I hope you can too...

Dac, you're not thinking clearly. Isn't this verse in exact opposition to the actions of God in the OT? Jesus is not come to destroy lives. The god of Elias destroyed lives. Your reasoning: former God, latter God = same God, while their actions / behaviour could not be more contradictory.
I addressed this early, you arent capable of seeing Jesus as Judge and bringer of Wrath, He came first as the Lamb to offer Salvation from the Wrath to come, of which He will pour out when He returns. YHWH and Jesus have the exact same attributes...

You complain I'm chopping up the Bible to fit my view, but the problem is that my view would stop being coherent if I adopt everything the Bible says. Just see the effects of complete subordination to biblical literalism on your moral code. You would follow a genocidal narcissist if only you believed he was god while you should be rejecting that self-proclaimed god on the basis of being a genocidal narcissist.
Then you better stop believing in Jesus, the bringer of Wrath who will literally destroy the Earth and all those who dont believe on Him and then He Himself will end up throwing them into the Lake of Fire....

It's unbelievable the apologetics you will go to to defend a being killing hundreds of men to prove he is God.
Umm He didnt bring the fire to prove He is God in this narrative, I think you arent able to decipher there are 2 events here maybe? The men who were killed were killed because they were coming to kill Elijah, God protected Elijah from murderers, that Evil God. The second time Fire didnt destroy anyone it was brought down to prove that God was real and Baal was a false god. ( Which in your made up Religion makes no sense as you liken YHWH to Baal, completely nonsensical to have YHWH competing against Himself)

Jesus rebukes his disciples for being of the wrong spirit, while all they were thinking was the same thing Elias and his god actually did, but Elias or his god was not of the wrong spirit? You're making an utter joke of Jesus to insinuate He would apply double standards like that. Shame on you.
You make an utter joke of Jesus in everything you write, shame on you. I was very clear as to what the difference was, it was of wrong Spirit for these men to want to have Jesus destroy them for not accepting Him into their village. They thought of Elijah why? Because it was the SAME PLACE, Elijah was justified to call down fire to protect himself, or shall no one be protected by God in your made up Religion. Anywho, what does Paul call God Art?

Heb 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire.

Our God is a consuming fire, where do you think he is pulling this reference from buddy? Go back and read that chapter, its very interesting how Paul calls the God of Jesus, the God of the Old Testament directly in those Scriptures, but you might not be able to discern what he is saying, but assuredly he again equates YHWH with the Father...

Seems like you made the problem worse, cause everything you say about Jesus being the manna, etc, simply isn't true. Still not convinced?
No sir its never made worse when we speak on this subject, every time it has and will continue to be shown that Jesus Father is YHWH. Every time you respond I will be given the opportunity to quote more and more and more and more Scriptures that show the Truth which is YHWH is Jesus God, is Pauls God, is Matt Mark Luke Jude John James God...

And keep your posts succinct and respectful next time, if you want to get any reply at all.
If you reply Amen, just more opportunity to preach the Gospel and show how Jesus and YHWH are the same, if no response then what I have written which is the Truth has no opposition and everyone who comes upon this Thread will see it stand against what you have posted.
 






Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,017
Rev 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

Rev 16usness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.
17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Whose Wrath is this Art? Is it Evil YHWHs? Or is it someone else Wrath that is being doled out?
Revelation is one giant metaphor. We already know some of the metaphors in those verses you posted:

Fire = Judgment
Wine / winepress = teachings of Christ / God
Blood = Life ("blood coming out of the winepress" could mean: "Christ will no longer be teaching but giving Life)
Sword = the Word that cuts evil from good, lie from truth
Eat = Convert
Eating flesh = converting the carnal / material bodies into spiritual ones
Birds = believers ("blood in the streets will feed all the birds in the air" = "eternal life will be bestowed upon all believers")

As you can see the meaning of the metaphors changes the entire interpretation. Try substituting these metaphors with their meaning. You can even apply this to all sayings of Jesus in the Gospels outside of Revelation if you think I'm just making this stuff up. I will also post a few years old article on the Gospel of Thomas soon, so you can see that I used the same meanings for these metaphors in that Sayings Gospel.

So what exactly is the difference between Jesus here, pouring out plagues and having men blaspheme His name and complain about the Wrath they are enduring for their Sins, and the plagues and YHWH bringing Wrath against the Israelities who blasphemed His name and constantly complained about everything?
I suppose the difference would be the interpretation. Jesus used parables and metaphors. According to popular interpretation, the old testamentary god used actual plagues. Maybe he didn't though, and maybe it's another corruption of scripture altogether.

I already explain the proper interpretation of this passage and what does Jesus quote only seconds later?

John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

So Jesus says it is written in the Prophets and He quotes a Scripture and says that Scripture is about Him and His Father correct? I'll answer for you because you seem incapable of answering correctly when posed with these questions, YES, He is saying this Scripture is about Him and His Father, so what did He quote:

Is 54:13 And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.

What is that word transliterated as LORD? Oh thats right YHWH, so what did Jesus just confirm again a few sentences down? That YHWH is the Father.
Your interpretation was proven incorrect. Read it again, please:

John 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.


Notice the significance of the word "true". One would use the word "true" to emphasise it's trueness against that which is assumed to be true. Imagine this analogy: You bought tickets for the game. You see a friend who also got tickets to the game. You tell him: "I have these tickets for the game." Your friend looks at them and notices something's off, that they're not the official ones and that you've been conned. He says while showing you his tickets: "These are the true tickets for the game." The word "true" is key. It implies the other(s) is not true.

... but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven

"... true bread from heaven, for ..."
For = Because "I am the bread of life." (John 6:35) Jesus emphasises that He is the bread of Life, an emphasis that can only mean the bread of Moses was not the bread of Life. Keep re-reading it if need be. I'm only trying to help.

Re Isaiah: I actually believe Isaiah could've been a true prophet, but the previously mentioned problem persists, that the account of the true Isaiah could very easily have been corrupted by the scribes of the Old Testament. So this verse:

Is 54:13 And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.

Might be completely legit and the reference to it in John 6 might also be. If you're gonna give me stick for not "knowing" which verses are legit and not, or accusing me of subjectively selecting the legitimacy of scripture as long as it fits my view, spare yourself the time and energy because that's not the problem. The problem is that the scripture of the old testament and the accounts of the prophets therein are unreliable. If you're going to stick with "the Bible is the complete infallible word of God", okay then, fine, suit yourself, just stop bothering me with it because I will never agree with that.

I'll reply to your second post when I get back home or tomorrow.
 






Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
As you can see the meaning of the metaphors changes the entire interpretation. Try substituting these metaphors with their meaning. You can even apply this to all sayings of Jesus in the Gospels outside of Revelation if you think I'm just making this stuff up.
Yea I do think your making it all up, and I dont think that these metaphors are the correct understanding of what is being written here. You can try and do anything you want but it does change the fact that Jesus is bringing Wrath. Are you going to invent a different meaning for Wrath too?

I suppose the difference would be the interpretation. Jesus used parables and metaphors. According to popular interpretation, the old testamentary god used actual plagues. Maybe he didn't though, and maybe it's another corruption of scripture altogether.
Its not a corruption, what it says is True. And again Jesus will merit out Wrath and He does merit out Wrath, He says He will, Paul says He will, John says He will, Matthew says He will, Mark, Luke says He will.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Eph 5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Rom 2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

Rom 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
(Interesting note here, this is a quote of the Old Testament, Deu 32;35 To me belongeth vengeance and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste. Whose vengeance is Paul talking about Art? Why is he quoting OT Scriptures? Paul is equating the God of the Old Testament who He worships with the God of the New Testament, because there is only one God, YHWH)

On and on and on I can go, Wrath of God, of which Jesus pours it out. More Scriptures for you to remove out of the Word of God, by the time were are done you wont be able to quote anything...

Your interpretation was proven incorrect.
No not really...

Re Isaiah: I actually believe Isaiah could've been a true prophet, but the previously mentioned problem persists, that the account of the true Isaiah could very easily have been corrupted by the scribes of the Old Testament. So this verse:

Is 54:13 And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.

Might be completely legit and the reference to it in John 6 might also be. If you're gonna give me stick for not "knowing" which verses are legit and not, or accusing me of subjectively selecting the legitimacy of scripture as long as it fits my view, spare yourself the time and energy because that's not the problem. The problem is that the scripture of the old testament and the accounts of the prophets therein are unreliable. If you're going to stick with "the Bible is the complete infallible word of God", okay then, fine, suit yourself, just stop bothering me with it because I will never agree with that.
Actually that is the entire problem, you are as bad, no I take that back, worse than the Muslims that pick and choose what Scriptures are true and "corrupted" your worse because you have the audacity to lie to others and try and convince them you are a Christian, but youre not your a Gnostic and a Gnostic who doesnt actually adhere to the basic tenets of Gnosticism. Apparently you are the one human on earth that knows exactly what is True and False, which is what happens when one elevates themselves into positions they shouldnt hold.

If one is to believe you, then they must completely submit to YOU and YOUR personal interpretation of everything, they must also submit to YOU and YOUR personal view as to which Scriptures are True and which are False. Otherwise they MUST be incorrect because you make the case over and over that those who believe in the actual Word of God dont know anything, and that the Word of God is corrupt, but we dont know where and when. We must rely on YOU to tell us...

You refuse to deal with the FACT that Jesus quoted the Old Testament Scriptures and the FACT that we know for certain that the Old Testament He was quoting is the SAME as the Old Testament we have now. How do we know this? The Dead Sea Scrolls. So your constant excuse and lie that the Scriptures are tampered with is just that an excuse and a lie so you can make up your own Religion instead of submitting to the Authority of the Word of God...

And Ill never stop "bothering" you with it, I will continue to show others what the Word of God states as opposed to your made up Religion and will continue to show your hypocrisy as you quote Scripture then deny them in the same breath...
 






Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,017
The Old Testament you have now is largely based on the 7th to 10th century AD Masoretic version! The differences between the Masoretic version and the Dead Sea Scrolls are numerous. Some chapters, especially Exodus are radically different. One of the verses that is so different that it changes everything, and it is mentioned in the article (which you clearly haven't read, since any genuine rebuttal would've tried to explain that. The biased ones would of course choose to ignore it) is the following:

Masoretic version

Deut 32:8-9:
When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For the LORD'S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

(This verse doesn't even make any sense)

The Dead Sea Scrolls!

4QDEUT:
"When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bny 'l[hym]). For Yahweh's portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance".

Elyon (EL!) gave the nations AS an inheritance to HIS SONS, he did not give the nations their inheritance. Elyon gave Jacob (Israel) to Yahweh, one of HIS SONS.

(This verse makes sense!)


Re metaphors: "you don' think ..." I've challenged you to read the verses with these meanings in mind. I've challenged you to use it on scripture outside of Revelation to see if it fits and if the interpretations I've shared with you make any sense. You can use a hyper concordance to do that. If you do it you could come back at me with an honest feedback. Instead you choose to ignore it and call me a liar and deceiver while I'm putting it out here for you and everyone else to test. You're only deceiving yourself.

I call myself a Christian first btw and I'm a bloody proud one at that. I found my way to Christ, something which would've never happened by listening to the likes of you and other Yahweh-groupies and Judaizers. You would sooner disqualify a Christian who embraces all Christian scripture and not the book that wasn't written for Christians or contains any Christian revelation, than a Christian who discards dozens of Christian Gospels yet believes in that book that wasn't written for Christians and doesn't contain any Christian revelation.

That's called the world upside-down aka Satanism, but at least I know the author of it.
 






Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
10,651
The Old Testament you have now is largely based on the 7th to 10th century AD Masoretic version! The differences between the Masoretic version and the Dead Sea Scrolls are numerous. Some chapters, especially Exodus are radically different. One of the verses that is so different that it changes everything, and it is mentioned in the article (which you clearly haven't read, since any genuine rebuttal would've tried to explain that. The biased ones would of course choose to ignore it) is the following:

Masoretic version

Deut 32:8-9:
When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For the LORD'S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

(This verse doesn't even make any sense)

The Dead Sea Scrolls!

4QDEUT:
"When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bny 'l[hym]). For Yahweh's portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance".

Elyon (EL!) gave the nations AS an inheritance to HIS SONS, he did not give the nations their inheritance. Elyon gave Jacob (Israel) to Yahweh, one of HIS SONS.

(This verse makes sense!)


Re metaphors: "you don' think ..." I've challenged you to read the verses with these meanings in mind. I've challenged you to use it on scripture outside of Revelation to see if it fits and if the interpretations I've shared with you make any sense. You can use a hyper concordance to do that. If you do it you could come back at me with an honest feedback. Instead you choose to ignore it and call me a liar and deceiver while I'm putting it out here for you and everyone else to test. You're only deceiving yourself.

I call myself a Christian first btw and I'm a bloody proud one at that. I found my way to Christ, something which would've never happened by listening to the likes of you and other Yahweh-groupies and Judaizers. You would sooner disqualify a Christian who embraces all Christian scripture and not the book that wasn't written for Christians or contains any Christian revelation, than a Christian who discards dozens of Christian Gospels yet believes in that book that wasn't written for Christians and doesn't contain any Christian revelation.

That's called the world upside-down aka Satanism, but at least I know the author of it.
I don't pretend to be a Bible scholar but is this the point you refer to...

The LXX. has "according to the number of the angels of God," an arbitrary departure from the original text, in accommodation, probably, to the later Jewish notion of each nation having its guardian angel. The Lord's portion is his people (cf. Exodus 15:16; Exodus 19:5; 1 Samuel 10:1; Psalm 78:71). The lot of his inheritance; literally, the cord, etc., the allusion being to the measuring of land by a cord, equivalent to the portion by measure which Jehovah allotted to himself as his inheritance

http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/32-8.htm

Notes section at the bottom
 






Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
The Old Testament you have now is largely based on the 7th to 10th century AD Masoretic version! The differences between the Masoretic version and the Dead Sea Scrolls are numerous. Some chapters, especially Exodus are radically different. One of the verses that is so different that it changes everything, and it is mentioned in the article (which you clearly haven't read, since any genuine rebuttal would've tried to explain that. The biased ones would of course choose to ignore it) is the following:
Again man Ive read your article, I read on the first board you posted it on, the second and now this time as well. I have told you I dont have the time to line by line dissect your religion, look how long of posts I make to rebut your posts on here, to rebut your entire article would take forever. I have time much better spent elsewhere. As for you assertions about the Deut 32:8-9, Ill let the guy you believe to more intelligent than express my viewpoints on that which in one part aligns with what you wrote and in another and overall doesnt. The Most High God is YHWH not what you suggest as tho its a different God but here Mike explains it much more in depth than I can:

http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1278&context=lts_fac_pubs

Re metaphors: "you don' think ..." I've challenged you to read the verses with these meanings in mind. I've challenged you to use it on scripture outside of Revelation to see if it fits and if the interpretations I've shared with you make any sense. You can use a hyper concordance to do that. If you do it you could come back at me with an honest feedback. Instead you choose to ignore it and call me a liar and deceiver while I'm putting it out here for you and everyone else to test. You're only deceiving yourself.
I looked at the verses I quoted you with your ideology in mind, and it really doesnt make sense, it also more than anything doesnt address the whole WRATH part, which is why I am quoting all of that, because you keep trying to ignore the FACT that Jesus is going to be bringing Wrath just like YHWH did/does...

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God; the fierce wrath of God against sinners is compared to a winepress; and the wicked antichristian party are likened to clusters of grapes; who being ripe for destruction, are cast into it, and pressed, squeezed, and trodden down by the mighty power of Christ, the Word of God, whose vesture is therefore before said to be dipped in blood; the same metaphor is used in Revelation 14:19 the allusion seems to be to Isaiah 63:3.


Is 63:3 I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.
4 For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come.

That is the proper understanding of what Jesus is going to do, as it is also a reference to YHWH, which is exactly what John and Jesus are speaking about. The whole WRATH part that you keep ignoring, it doesnt fit into context with your ideology or what you say the metaphor stands for. So whats the more reasonable explanation, that John who worships YHWH and His Son Jesus is being told by YHWH and Jesus that he John is witnessing the fulfillment of Scripture or your made up Religion? Ill go with John, Jesus, and YHWH over you brother...

I call myself a Christian first btw and I'm a bloody proud one at that.
I can call myself a Muslim but if I reject the Quran and the god of Muhammad it doesnt matter what I proclaim myself to be, I am not a Muslim. You can call yourself a Christian but youre not, your a Gnostic and a Gnostic that doesnt even represent Gnosticism in the manner in which the mass of Gnostics would agree with you.

I found my way to Christ, something which would've never happened by listening to the likes of you and other Yahweh-groupies and Judaizers.
You havent found Christ yet brother, at least not the Biblical Christ, the real Christ. You found the Christ you invented, that is all...

You would sooner disqualify a Christian who embraces all Christian scripture
But you dont!!! As is seen everytime you and I converse, you remove most of the New Testament, why? Because the New Testament rejects your Religion. Just like your boy Valentinus when he cut the New Testament up to suit his personal ideology, because his ideology and the New Testament doesnt actually mesh...

or contains any Christian revelation
But it does and you are literally calling Jesus a liar by saying and sticking to that, who did Mose write about? Of whom does the Scriptures attest too? JESUS!!!

than a Christian who discards dozens of Christian Gospels
Lol lets reword this correctly, you mean GNOSTIC false gospels, nothing Christian about them...

believes in that book that wasn't written for Christians and doesn't contain any Christian revelation.
John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Acts 8:26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.
27 And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,
28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.
29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:
33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.

34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

Should I quote every single instance of Paul preaching, and where he starts? It would be with the Old Testament!

Funny how Jesus calls them fools and then He goes thru the Scriptures and does what? Expounds all the thing concerning Himself, but you want me to reject the Scripture Jesus, Paul and Phillip are recorded as using to testify of Jesus? No thanks, I will follow Christ and Paul and continue to demonstrate Christ in the Old Testament, because He is what it is all about. If you ever get Born Again and find the real Christ you will understand this as well brother...
 






Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,017
There are no Christian revelations in a book written when Christ hadn't yet been revealed. The Gospel / The Good News is the Christian Revelation.

And stop lying, you haven't read it like you say you did. I haven't seen a single one of your arguments that addresses one of the article's sources, evidences or arguments. You say you don't have time to rebut my article because it would take too long, but all I need is one argument or piece of evidence to be rebutted at a time. Instead you're just piling up the tldr's with your proselytism of your standard Christianity everyone already knows, quoting scripture ad nauseam. Then I refute your interpretation of a scripture to which you simply say, "no I was right" without arguing the points I made. When I present you specific scripture (2 freaking verses) that I want you to address you pass it on to Michael Heiser, of whom I never said he was more intelligent. He has the advantage because he does this for a living. I don't particularly find him an interesting scholar. I myself can barely sit through 10 minutes of his lectures. Why don't you in your own words explain 4QDEUT instead of throwing 75 pages of literature to your opponent? Do you see me do that? I can throw you Thomas Römer's website with 30+ hours of lecture if you wanna inform yourself on Yahweh's identity. "Shit I don't have an answer to this, I'll just throw some scientist's book at him as a rebuttal." Summarise the main arguments and conclusion yourself. Or haven't you read it either?

Why don't you pick something out of the article, anything, something small, and target it, one at a time? I've been urging you to be more concise anyway so it's a win-win. The Bible's thesis of "god-is-god" is contradictory, it's a stone cold fact you can't get away from. Stop blaming "my personal religion, interpretation, ...". The scribes and Pharisees fucked up, blame them. They missed bits disguising that YHVH the LORD is Satan. Like here in these two accounts of the same story:

2 Samuel 24:1:

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

1 Chronicles 21:1:

And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

Am I reading something into this because of bias? Or am I reading what it literally says?

You can also stop acting like I'm "the only one with this made up religion". Yeah, its followers have been exterminated to the last woman and child after 12 centuries of refusing to go away, texts and scriptures destroyed, doctrines buried deep under the ground. Before that we had a theological schism in the early Church that revolved about the place of the creator god with many theologians and Christians on the side I am on right now. You probably would've been in the minority back then.

Heck, 99% of rabbis are on the side that says the God of the NT is not YHVH, which makes your depiction of my position nothing more than a cheap caricature.

I can call myself a Muslim but if I reject the Quran and the god of Muhammad it doesnt matter what I proclaim myself to be, I am not a Muslim.
What a ridiculous analogy. The Gospel is my Bible and the God of Christ is my God. With embracing all of Christian scripture I mean I don't throw away entire gospels and books like you do. Sure, I won't take every word or every verse for granted, because they were written down by men and men make mistakes, men are forgetful, and most important of all, men can be corrupted.

The Temple of Jerusalem is Yahweh's Temple and Jesus' Father's temple
Everything in that land was Yahweh's at the time. From the stones in the desert to Jerusalem and the pinnacle of the temple, all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. They were all his to give.

Jesus said: "Moses wrote of me"
Where?

The god of this world
Who is the god of this world?

GNOSTIC false gospels, nothing Christian about them...
When we were Hebrews, we were orphans and had only our mother, but when we became Christians, we had both father and mother. - Gospel of Philip

Christ came to ransom some, to save others, to redeem others. He ransomed those who were strangers and made them his own. And he set his own apart, those whom he gave as a pledge according to his plan. It was not only when he appeared that he voluntarily laid down his life, but he voluntarily laid down his life from the very day the world came into being. Then he came first in order to take it, since it had been given as a pledge. It fell into the hands of robbers and was taken captive, but he saved it. He redeemed the good people in the world as well as the evil. - Gospel of Philip

Before Christ came, there was no bread in the world, just as Paradise, the place where Adam was, had many trees to nourish the animals but no wheat to sustain man. Man used to feed like the animals, but when Christ came, the perfect man, he brought bread from heaven in order that man might be nourished with the food of man. - Gospel of Philip

How shall we go to the Gentiles and preach the gospel of the Kingdom of the Son of Man? If they did not spare Him, how will they spare us?
Then Mary stood up, greeted them all, and said to her brethren, Do not weep and do not grieve nor be irresolute, for His grace will be entirely with you and will protect you. But rather, let us praise His greatness, for He has prepared us and made us into Men.
- Gospel of Mary Magdalene

THE LIVING BOOK IN THE HEART OF THE LITTLE CHILDREN

In their heart, the living book of the living was manifest, the book that was written in the thought and in the mind of the father and, from before the foundation of all, is in that incomprehensible part of him.

This is the book that no one found possible to take, since it was reserved for him who will take it and be slain. No one could appear among those who believed in salvation as long as that book had not appeared. For this reason, the compassionate, faithful Jesus was patient in his sufferings until he took that book, since he knew that his death meant life for many. Just as in the case of a will that has not yet been opened, the fortune of the deceased master of the house is hidden, so also in the case of all that had been hidden as long as the father of all was invisible and unique in himself, in whom every space has its source. For this reason Jesus appeared. He put on that book. He was nailed to a cross. He affixed the edict of the father to the cross.


- Gospel of Truth

Must ... turn away ... eyes ... from evil ... false ... gospels.

Fool.
 






Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,017
I don't pretend to be a Bible scholar but is this the point you refer to...

The LXX. has "according to the number of the angels of God," an arbitrary departure from the original text, in accommodation, probably, to the later Jewish notion of each nation having its guardian angel. The Lord's portion is his people (cf. Exodus 15:16; Exodus 19:5; 1 Samuel 10:1; Psalm 78:71). The lot of his inheritance; literally, the cord, etc., the allusion being to the measuring of land by a cord, equivalent to the portion by measure which Jehovah allotted to himself as his inheritance

http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/32-8.htm

Notes section at the bottom
The LXX basically states the same as the Qumran version. EL / Most High divides the nations between his 70 sons / angels. 70 nations, 70 sons, while the Most High remains ruler of Heaven and Earth. Not 70 nations to 69 sons plus Himself.
 






elsbet

Star
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,659
Jesus Dac. I even admitted that I don't have an answer and explained why I don't need one and you still get upset. The Bible is the reference for the thesis that the NT God and OT God are the same. If the thesis is to be valid, the thesis cannot contradict itself. And as I've shown it does. It's however, not up to me to provide answers to every line in the Gospel which is in agreement with the OT. The responsibility of non-contradiction lies with the Bible and those who defend aforementioned thesis.

What did that god do after Numbers 11:18? Is that your question? This is what he did:

Numbers 11:31. And a wind going out from the Lord, taking quails up beyond the sea brought them, and cast them into the camp for the space of one day’s journey, on every side of the camp round about, and they flew in the air two cubits high above the ground.

11:32. The people therefore rising up all that day, and night, and the next day, gathered together of quails, he that did least, ten cores: and they dried them round about the camp.

11:33. As yet the flesh was between their teeth, neither had that kind of meat failed: when behold the wrath of the Lord being provoked against the people, struck them with an exceeding great plague.

11:34. And that place was called, The graves of lust: for there they buried the people that had lusted.


He killed his subjects with a plague before they could even swallow.

Juxtapose that one against what Jesus did:

Matthew 14:15. And when it was evening, his disciples came to him, saying: This is a desert place, and the hour is now passed: send away the multitudes, that going into the towns, they may buy themselves victuals.

14:16. But Jesus said to them, They have no need to go: give you them to eat.

14:17. They answered him: We have not here, but five loaves, and two fishes.

14:18. Who said to them: Bring them hither to me.

14:19. And when he had commanded the multitude to sit down upon the grass, he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitudes.

14:20. And they did all eat, and were filled. And they took up what remained, twelve full baskets of fragments.

14:21. And the number of them that did eat, was five thousand men, besides women and children.


And why should I even mirror anything to Jesus. Are the actions of Moses' desert god not bad enough without having to compare them to the perfect man / real God? A supposedly all-powerful being killing his own subjects who have dragged along behind him in the desert for 40 years, because they complained of hunger they didn't have before in Egypt?

You're entire effing post is about how I put things out of context, misquote scripture, fit scripture to support my bias, yadda yadda, man I've never even had a girlfriend who whined like that. Let's check that misquoted put-out-of-context scripture then:
We're gonna read the scripture you've provided together, attentively please, and find out who's misrepresenting it:

Jesus said: "Verily, Verily, I say unto you ..." So far so good, still on the same wave length, I hope? "Moses gave ..." Very important here is the past tense. Well, use of past tense is obvious, but it becomes extremely relevant because of what you should focus on later. Here we go. "Moses gave you not that bread from heaven;" Very interesting. Jesus said the manna they were given by Moses was not from Heaven, even though "God" was with them. "but my Father..." Jesus says "my Father", he doesn't say God just yet to make it clear He's talking about His Father. "but my Father giveth ..." Present tense, not past tense! " ... you the true bread from heaven." Jesus explicitly says that Moses did not (past tense!) give them the bread of heaven. He also explicitly says that His Father is giving them (present tense!) the true bread from Heaven. Nowhere does Jesus say it was His Father who gave them bread in the desert with Moses. Nowhere. You're reading that into it. Next part:

"For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world."

It can't get any clearer than this. The true bread of God (He says God now, to make it clear His Father is God) is not what Moses gave in the desert, it is Himself. The only logical conclusion here is that the manna Moses or his desert god gave was not Jesus.


Flesh that gave his people the plague before they could even enjoy their meal and killed them.

Jesus Christ did not come down, because Jesus explicitly says He is the bread from Heaven and that neither Moses or his desert god gave the bread from heaven.

The scripture clearly says the opposite of what you say it says and that's how we end up with good Christians ...
... following the Devil. All your mumbo jumbo about Jesus being the manna, Jesus feeding the people in the desert, supporting them like a rock, etc it's just not true!

It is you who are not reading scripture the way you're supposed to.

You're not making sense. These people were starving as they were led into the desert for 40 years. It's easy to side with the account of Jahwists and people who believe in Moses against the people that bloody died in the desert. Might as well believe the writings of Pol Pot groupies saying the Cambodjans had it coming. Ridiculous!

Let's go to the brazen serpent for brevity's sake, because Paul's words can be relativised in context of his proselytism.

Here we clearly see Moses' god commanding his prophet to make a fiery serpent and that the people who worship it shall live.

Let's go to Revelation's account of the deceiver / beast:

13:13. And he did great signs, so that he made also fire to come down from heaven unto the earth, in the sight of men.
(We already know who that is)

13:14. And he seduced them that dwell on the earth, for the signs which were given him to do in the sight of the beast: saying to them that dwell on the earth that they should make the image of the beast which had the wound by the sword and lived.

The image of the beast, would that look something like a serpent? Something like this:



Are we seeing the people of Moses bending the knee to an image of the serpent / beast and if they didn't do it they would die? Did you really say that this serpent is Jesus? Am I really reading this about my beloved Christ? Somebody pinch me.

What does this say other than belief in the Son of Man will grant eternal life, while belief in Moses' serpent was required to not die on the spot? Can the difference not be greater?

What an angel. Angel of death perhaps. Tricking his own subjects into submission of the serpent. Was it because that god is evil and vindictive? Why yes, that's exactly what it is. Ockham's razor. In fact, it's outright sadistic, instilling people with a disease and then demanding worship to be healed from that disease. This is one the very distinguishing traits of Satan in all old mythologies!

Tell that to the Israelites.

And I dedicate a whole chapter to the dimension of Justice and what place it has in the greater moral scheme. Justice is a coverup for good and evil, arbitrarily devised by a lawmaker, not inherently universal and transcendent. Only Good is, but for that you need knowledge of good and evil, which the "god of Justice" prohibited Man to attain, so Man would follow his law.

The fact that you and millions of others believe that is exactly the reason why Christianity is in such a bad shape and a tragedy I'm trying to undo.

So? Maybe Elias was an actual prophet, but different than the Elias we know from the OT. Maybe he didn't call fire from heaven. Maybe he didn't send she-bears to tear up 42 children just because they mocked him. Maybe those tales of Elias are manufactured by the scribes and Pharisees to instil fear in their subjects; and the OT version you have in your possession is with 100% certainty a Pharisaic product, don't even doubt that fact.

Maybe there's a hidden meaning in that passage of Matthew. Peter suggests to make 3 tabernacles, but the Father from heaven says "listen to Jesus, in him I am well pleased". What does that mean? Listen to Jesus and not to Moses or Elias? No tabernacles for Moses and Elias? When the disciples throw their face down to the ground and look back up, they only see Jesus. Moses and Elias are gone.

They ask him when Elias will come. But Jesus said Elias already had come but they knew him not, referring to John the Baptist.

There are so many mysteries here that neither you or me can provide a definite answer to, and not in the least will we find the answer in that book that has been tampered with by the very people Jesus warned about; the hypocrites and liars, scribes and Pharisees, descendants of Cain himself.


Dac, you're not thinking clearly. Isn't this verse in exact opposition to the actions of God in the OT? Jesus is not come to destroy lives. The god of Elias destroyed lives. Your reasoning: former God, latter God = same God, while their actions / behaviour could not be more contradictory.

You complain I'm chopping up the Bible to fit my view, but the problem is that my view would stop being coherent if I adopt everything the Bible says. Just see the effects of complete subordination to biblical literalism on your moral code. You would follow a genocidal narcissist if only you believed he was god while you should be rejecting that self-proclaimed god on the basis of being a genocidal narcissist.

It's unbelievable the apologetics you will go to to defend a being killing hundreds of men to prove he is God. Amazing. I can't add anything here because you're not being rational at all. Jesus rebukes his disciples for being of the wrong spirit, while all they were thinking was the same thing Elias and his god actually did, but Elias or his god was not of the wrong spirit? You're making an utter joke of Jesus to insinuate He would apply double standards like that. Shame on you.

Seems like you made the problem worse, cause everything you say about Jesus being the manna, etc, simply isn't true. Still not convinced? Scroll back up and read the verses as often as you need.

And keep your posts succinct and respectful next time, if you want to get any reply at all.

It can't get any clearer than this. The true bread of God (He says God now, to make it clear His Father is God) is not what Moses gave in the desert, it is Himself. The only logical conclusion here is that the manna Moses or his desert god gave was not Jesus...

Jesus Christ did not come down, because Jesus explicitly says He is the bread from Heaven and that neither Moses or his desert god gave the bread from heaven.


This is foreshadowing.

They did not starve-- it was more along the line of Oye! Manna, again? Instructions were given with the manna that required Faith. Followed, they would never do without. John 6 says Moses did not give the manna-- because he didn't. It was through no merit of his own. And Jesus is the Bread of Heaven. The manna was bread to sustain the body; Jesus sustains the soul.

"... no one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me may not draw him--"
 






Karlysymon

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,421
Why don't you pick something out of the article, anything, something small, and target it, one at a time? I've been urging you to be more concise anyway so it's a win-win. The Bible's thesis of "god-is-god" is contradictory, it's a stone cold fact you can't get away from. Stop blaming "my personal religion, interpretation, ...". The scribes and Pharisees fucked up, blame them. They missed bits disguising that YHVH the LORD is Satan. Like here in these two accounts of the same story:

2 Samuel 24:1:

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

1 Chronicles 21:1:

And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

Am I reading something into this because of bias? Or am I reading what it literally says?

You can also stop acting like I'm "the only one with this made up religion". Yeah, its followers have been exterminated to the last woman and child after 12 centuries of refusing to go away, texts and scriptures destroyed, doctrines buried deep under the ground. Before that we had a theological schism in the early Church that revolved about the place of the creator god with many theologians and Christians on the side I am on right now. You probably would've been in the minority back then.
Those two seemingly contradictory opening lines have always stood out to me because this account of numbering the Israelite army has one of my favorite verses and I think God’s statement/actions further down in the narrative lets us know who really it was that moved upon David.

CHRONICLES
Then David said to God, “I have sinned greatly by doing this. Now, I beg you, take away the guilt of your servant. I have done a very foolish thing.”

9 The Lord said to Gad, David’s seer, 10 “Go and tell David, ‘This is what the Lord says: I am giving you three options. Choose one of them for me to carry out against you.’”

11 So Gad went to David and said to him, “This is what the Lord says: ‘Take your choice: 12 three years of famine, three months of being swept away before your enemies, with their swords overtaking you, or three days of the sword of the Lord—days of plague in the land, with the angel of the Lord ravaging every part of Israel.’ Now then, decide how I should answer the one who sent me.”

13 David said to Gad, “I am in deep distress. Let me fall into the hands of the Lord, for his mercy is very great; but do not let me fall into human hands.”

14 So the Lord sent a plague on Israel, and seventy thousand men of Israel fell dead. 15 And God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem. But as the angel was doing so, the Lord saw it and relented concerning the disaster and said to the angel who was destroying the people, “Enough! Withdraw your hand.” The angel of the Lord was then standing at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite.

2 SAMUEL
David was conscience-stricken after he had counted the fighting men, and he said to the Lord, “I have sinned greatly in what I have done. Now, Lord, I beg you, take away the guilt of your servant. I have done a very foolish thing.”

11 Before David got up the next morning, the word of the Lord had come to Gad the prophet, David’s seer: 12 “Go and tell David, ‘This is what the Lord says: I am giving you three options. Choose one of them for me to carry out against you.’”

13 So Gad went to David and said to him, “Shall there come on you three years of famine in your land? Or three months of fleeing from your enemies while they pursue you? Or three days of plague in your land? Now then, think it over and decide how I should answer the one who sent me.”

14 David said to Gad, “I am in deep distress. Let us fall into the hands of the Lord, for his mercy is great; but do not let me fall into human hands.”

15 So the Lord sent a plague on Israel from that morning until the end of the time designated, and seventy thousand of the people from Dan to Beersheba died. When the angel stretched out his hand to destroy Jerusalem, the Lord relented concerning the disaster and said to the angel who was afflicting the people, “Enough! Withdraw your hand.” The angel of the Lord was then at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite.
 






Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
There are no Christian revelations in a book written when Christ hadn't yet been revealed. The Gospel / The Good News is the Christian Revelation.
Well considering you refuse to read the Old Testament with the Holy Spirit guiding you to see the Christian revelations, then of course you say these things. If you were to get Born Again and have the Holy Spirit guide you while reading the Old Testament you would see clearly that the entire Old Testament is foreshadowing of the Messiah and thus Christ. This means simply that the Old Testament IS a book written ABOUT the Christ and hence is a complete Revelation of Him, but again until you are Born Again you will never see it.

And stop lying, you haven't read it like you say you did.
I have zero reason to lie concerning it, you can believe me or not, I read it a few months ago when we were having our last back and forth discussion about it.

I haven't seen a single one of your arguments that addresses one of the article's sources, evidences or arguments. You say you don't have time to rebut my article because it would take too long, but all I need is one argument or piece of evidence to be rebutted at a time.
Why are you so worried about me rebutting your personal religion? I rebut your points in these posts all the time, would you like to tell me nothing that you have said on this form are points you have made in your article? I literally just gave you a rebuttal to your point concerning Ex 32, and summed it up in one sentence, but you refused to read the article that articulates it in a much deeper fashion. And then you complain about me rebutting it, I guess it wasnt rebutted in the manner you want me to rebut it, ok well it still stand rebutted...

Then I refute your interpretation of a scripture to which you simply say, "no I was right" without arguing the points I made.
What is there to argue? I have given my interpretation on it, you tell me I am wrong, would you like me to restate the exact same things again? Jesus is the Manna, the Israelites were given Jesus and they complained about it and rejected it. Doesnt it sound an awful lot like what happens in the New Testament when Jesus Himself comes to them? That He isnt good enough so they reject Him? There are so many different Spiritual Applications to these events and the parallels to Christ but you willfully ignore them, or you are literally too Spiritually Blind to accept them or see them. I mean look at you, I quote Jesus, Paul, and others who ALL say that Jesus is what the Old Testament is about and you still REJECT IT!!! Why? Why will you not Repent of your own made up Religions and Ideologies and accept on Faith what JESUS HIMSELF said and then approach the Old Testament with this mindset?

How does Peter preach the Gospel Art? Lets see if the way I preach the Gospel which is to say that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament Law and Prophets or if the way you think one should preach the Gospel which is too say that everything about the Old Testament is Satanic and the God of the Old Testament is Satanic and go from there is the way we should preach the Gospel. I would think if one calls themselves a Christian they ought to preach in the same manner as the man Jesus called Rock...

Acts 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come:
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:
26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:
27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.
29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

So Art how does Peter preach Christ? How many people are saved by his preaching?

Would you like to see the Old Testament Prophets that Peter quoted, declaring they are speaking of Jesus and the fulfillment of the Holy Spirit being poured out upon men? Lets take a look shall we?

Joel 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
30 And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.
31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.
32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call.

So what word is that that is rendered Lord here again Art? YHWH, thats right YHWH, so we have Peter declaring that Pentecost is the fulfillment of the Prophet Joel declaring the pouring out of the Holy Spirit of YHWH upon all men, and that we are saved by YHWH!!!

Who else is he quoting? David and what does he quote from David?

Ps 16:8 I have set the Lord always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope.
10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Who is David setting before his face always Art? Oh thats right YHWH, David is always setting YHWH before his face, and then what does David say of YHWH? Thats right, that YHWH will not leave His Holy One see corruption or be left in Hell, or the grave. What does Peter tell this is a prophecy of Art?

He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

Thats right, David was writing of Jesus Christ Himself and was speaking of Christs resurrection, but you want to tell me about the Old Testament that There are no Christian revelations in a book written when Christ hadn't yet been revealed? Humm who should I believe you and your made up religion or Peter?

Is it very clear to anyone with eyes that Peter is declaring that YHWH is God, and that Jesus came from YHWH, only a Spiritually Blind or willfully ignorant person couldnt understand and see this...

How Stephen Art, what does he say as he preaches Christ? Does he agree with you that YHWH is the devil or does he preach that YHWH is God and that Jesus came from YHWH? Lets remember he died for this testimony, the first recorded Christian martyr!

Acts 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,
3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.

Alright so he starts by saying God is the God who called Abraham so what God called Abraham Art?

Gen 12:1 Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

The Lord is who again Art? Thats right YHWH, so Stephen the first Christian marytr who died giving this sermon to proclaim Christ, outright says that the God he is speaking about is YHWH point blank period. Lets move on tho who else does he mention?

Acts 7:8 And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat the twelve patriarchs.

Alright now we have Issac Jacob and then the 12 Patriarchs of Israel, and what God is the one who they all worshiped? Come on class we know the answer by now, lets say it together! YHWH!!! Thats right!! He goes on to say:

Acts 7:29 Then fled Moses at this saying, and was a stranger in the land of Madian, where he begat two sons.
30 And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.
31 When Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold it, the voice of the Lord came unto him,
32 Saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold.


Well now we see that the God who Stephen already declared was the One True God being YHWH, now comes to Moses and what does the Lord aka YHWH say, that He is the God of all the Patriarchs. So Moses followed the same God that Stephen declares is the God of Glory!!! Further more he says:

Acts 7:44 Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen.
45 Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;
46 Who found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob.
47 But Solomon built him an house.

So we now see the link from Moses to Joshua to David and Solomon, all of them worshiped the same exact God, YHWH. He continues and says:

Acts 7:52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.


What does he say Art? That the Pharisees, killed the Righteous Men of God who showed in the past the coming of Jesus Christ, of which they the Pharisees betrayed and killed, and then they turn to kill him, and who does he see? The God of the Old Testament, YHWH and Jesus at His Right Hand!!!

How about Paul? How does Paul deleiver the Gospel, as you would like us to, by calling YHWH Satan and annulling the entire Old Testament or by how I say we ought to which is to show Christ as the Son of YHWH and the fulfillment of the Old Testament?

Acts 13:
16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience.
17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it.

What God is Paul declaring here Art? YHWH of course, and what does he say of this God Art?

Acts 13:23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:

Of the seed of David, who worshiped YHWH, hath YHWH according to the promise YHWH made, raise unto Israel as Savior, JESUS. Pretty freaking clear here buddy, Paul worshiped YHWH, and Paul clearly preaches here that Jesus is the Savior that YHWH promised!!!

Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David.
35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:
37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.

What God is he declaring here Art? The God who said to David, in the second Psalm, Thou art my Son and this day I have begotten thee, what God declared that Art? YHWH!!! And Paul quotes the same Scripture as Peter, showing yet again that this is a Prophecy of Christ, and that the God of Israel is the one who raised up Jesus!!!

All you have to do Art is read the Scriptures and you will see that everytime anyone preached they preached that Jesus is the Son of YHWH, there is absolutely no possible way around this, unless of course you literally ignore it all, and then remove it all from the Scriptures. Which as I said before the long we continue this discourse, the more I will be quoting showing in the New Testament that YHWH is being spoken about and the more and more you will have to remove this from the Scriptures you can possibly use to justify Christ in. By the time we are done you will not be able to use any Christian Scirptures and all you will be left with is those False Gnostic Scriptures, why? Because Christians worship the God that Peter preached, the God that Stephen preached, the God that Paul preached which is the God of the Old Testament, YHWH!!!

Instead you're just piling up the tldr's with your proselytism of your standard Christianity everyone already knows, quoting scripture ad nauseam.
Lol you must not know them or you wouldnt be making these statements all the time. Im just waiting for you to make a logical reason why Peter Paul Stephen and everyone else is wrong in declaring YHWH is the God of Christ. They all say it, but you know better than them right, lol thats a hoot!!! Do I trust you or them? Tough one, and the point of showing all these Scriptures is so that those who havent already turned their heart from Christ as you have, will be able to see the difference between what you state and what the Word of God states. Like I said Im not here to change your mind, God Himself will have to break that down for you, but there are those here that just read and it needs to be shown them the hypocrisy you preach as opposed to what the Patriarchs, the Disciples and Apostles preached, which is NOT what you say...

When I present you specific scripture (2 freaking verses) that I want you to address you pass it on to Michael Heiser, of whom I never said he was more intelligent. He has the advantage because he does this for a living. I don't particularly find him an interesting scholar. I myself can barely sit through 10 minutes of his lectures. Why don't you in your own words explain 4QDEUT instead of throwing 75 pages of literature to your opponent?
You must have not even bothered to open it up, its like 25 small pages, probably would be the equivalent of one of our posts on here. And I did summaries it, El isnt a different God, El is YHWH, as you can see by reading the Old Testament, which I dont believe you have EVER read for yourself. If you understand Polemics of the writers of the Bible they purposefully take other gods and use their titles to incorporate them into YHWH to show that YHWH is Supreme to all of them. To make the conclusion that El is a wholly different God is to undermine the multiple other times the phrase is used specifically to denote YHWH.

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
21 And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.
22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the Lord, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,

There you go, very clear and blatant Scripture to prove my point, YHWH the Most High God!! EL is YHWH according to Scriptures, so your first problem is you have chosen to separate EL from YHWH, when as anyone who reads and studies the Old Testament knows, EL is YHWH. Same God...

I agreed that this should be rendered the Sons of God, and that is pertaining to the Divine Council of which YHWH is the head of, not some other god. Ps 82 explains this in more detail:

Ps 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

This is clearly YHWH speaking as God, and He stands in the congregation of the mighty or the Divine Council and He is judging them according to how unjust they are. Do you know what He is speaking about here Art? He is speaking about how He gave the Sons of God to be rulers over the Nations OTHER than Israel, and they did a horrible job, they corrupted them and made them to worship themselves instead of YHWH the MOST HIGH GOD. So this is YHWHs judgement against them, that they shall all die like men and once they die like men (instead of being Immortal as sons of God) YHWH, God, will inherit all the nations He gave them to rule over. All of this relates to Genesis and the Book of Enoch where we see the Angels come to Earth and fornicate with Humanity teach them dark arts ect and YHWH sends the Flood. Its all linked together.

So no I reject your Thesis, it makes zero sense in light of the whole of the Old Testament which I dont believe you have ever read once, and the thesis which I proposed as much more expounded upon in that short link, completes the entire understanding of the Old Testament. It completes this Psalm, it completes Genesis account of the sons of God coming to Earth, and it completes the accounts of why Israel was told to utterly destroy some parts of Canaan because they were descendants of the sons of God. I could walk you through all this but you wouldnt be able to accept any of it if you choose to see El and YHWH as separate or view YHWH as Satan....

They missed bits disguising that YHVH the LORD is Satan.
LOL wow, ok so you really are willing to think that their overall ideology is that YHWH is Satan and this is a mis step? Theres no possible way it could be the other way around? HAHAH SMH, this is a ridiculous thesis, no one should ever take you serious. If anything the mess up would be they accidentally put that there, not accidentally forgot to take it out. However I reject both, here is what I believe:


https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=784

Which concludes in saying:

The problem of how a loving God (1 John 4:8) can send a “strong delusion” (2 Thessalonians 2:11), harden someone’s heart (Exodus 9:12), or incite someone to sin (as in the case of David numbering Israel—2 Samuel 24:1), can be compared to God’s work in nature. In one sense, a person could speak of God killing someone who jumps from a 100-story building to his death, because it was God Who set in motion the law of gravity (but He did not force the person over the edge). Some inspired writers wrote from this viewpoint, which was customary in their culture.

Truly, similar to how Pharaoh hardened his heart because God gave him occasion to do such, and similar to how Job suffered because God allowed Satan to strike Job with calamity, God allowed Satan to incite David to sin (1 Chronicles 21:1). Israel suffered as a direct result of Satan’s workings in the life of King David, which God allowed. Thus, both God and Satan legitimately could be said to have incited the king—but in different ways (and for different reasons).
Am I reading something into this because of bias? Or am I reading what it literally says?
Bias...

You can also stop acting like I'm "the only one with this made up religion".
No I wont stop because it is the Truth. You have created your own personal interpretation on everything, even Gnostics wouldnt accept most of what you propose. One minute your siding with Gnostics the next your completely rejecting basic Gnostic tenets, for example all creation is Evil. That is very basic Gnostic tenet, you dont adhere to this, youve created your own version and now want to tell both Christians that they are wrong in their beliefs, and would like to tell Gnostics that they dont understand Gnoticism correctly. The method you have chosen to do this is by elevating yourself into a position where you believe you have more understanding or better or wiser understanding than both adherents and feel its your mission to guide all into an understanding that literally you ALONE posses out of all of Human History. You and AS are identical in this methodology, save he believes himself to also be an expert in Islam where I dont see you trying to make Christianity and Islam mix.

You probably would've been in the minority back then.
Lol no that is just your wishful thinking and hopefulness in your made up Revisionist History. If Gnosticism was the Truth it would have been catapulted to the top and would be the dominate ideology. Heres what I find hilarious, your Gnostic god is a weak and pitiful god, it cant make sure to preserve its writings and get its Truth out to the masses. This weak and pathetic god let the world destroy it, burn it, bury it, and murder it off by your own admission. It has no power, it has no control, it has no ability to withstand anything. Its so lame it cant give its followers a True Gospel that can be used as a baseline of Evidence to hold other Gospels up to in order to determine if what they say are True or False. Look at you man, you cant even give me a basic default line of what parts of the New Testament are True and False, the same goes for your false weak god.

The One True God, YHWH, gave us the Bible, the complete Word of God and we can use it as a baseline to measure all other ideologies and writings, anything that contradicts it is False, anything that competes against it is False. The God of the Bible can actually be Tested and Proven, its called Prophecies, your weak god cant do anything, cant even keep its made up gospels to be preserved and circulated enough so that enough people held them in high standards and considered them worth dying for. My God and His followers preserved these Text and even tho the ENTIRE World has tried to destroy the Bible still it stands!!!

Heck, 99% of rabbis are on the side that says the God of the NT is not YHVH, which makes your depiction of my position nothing more than a cheap caricature.
Lol so you want me to take the words of the People who rejected Gods Son, that they dont believe that the God of the NT is YHWH? Thats a hoot, of course they dont accept that, if they did they would have to accept Jesus as their Messiah. They would have to accept that they killed their Messiah and the Son of God. They refuse to now, but one day they will, it even says it in their own Text:

Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

What a ridiculous analogy. The Gospel is my Bible and the God of Christ is my God.
No if you worshiped the God of Christ you would worship YHWH, instead you call the Father Satan..

With embracing all of Christian scripture I mean I don't throw away entire gospels and books like you do.
The Old Testament IS Christian Scripture it is literally all about Jesus Christ, He is the Angel in the Wilderness, He is the Manna from Heaven, He is the Rock from which water came, He is the Messiah all the Prophets and Law foretold, He is the literal embodiment of the entire Sacrificial System and Culture of Israel. He is found in EVERY Holy Day, He is found in every story, He is found in every single thing that has to do with the Old Testament, yet you absolutely throw all of it away!!

You throw away HUGE portions of the New Testament, look at everything Ive quoted so far you LITERALLY now have to throw all of that away, because all of it points to YHWH as the God of the Disciples, Prophets, Apostles and Jesus!!! And you have absolutely NO WAY to easily show to any human on Earth a simple method to determine what Text are Divine or not. Something they can easily and assuredly know without YOUR input.

I can tell everyone on Earth with 100% assurance, read the Word of God the Bible, its all True, in its Text you will find the One True God from start to finish, and it will testify that Jesus is God, the Messiah!!! Everything apart from that is man made ideologies, some will have truth in them, the ones that conform to the Word of God, but none are Divine. You cant even call ANY of the Text you read from Holy or Divine because you say men can corrupt them. You have either weak Faith in your god, or a weak god...

Everything in that land was Yahweh's at the time. From the stones in the desert to Jerusalem and the pinnacle of the temple, all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. They were all his to give.
Lol I see what you did there, how ridiculous again, funny how you didnt even bother to address what was written. Why does Jesus call the House of YHWH, His Fathers house? Try answering this time brother. As for your assertion, if the Old Testament was about Satan then why is it Jesus says this when Satan offers him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor?

Matt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

And

Matt 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

And

Matt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

I mean you do realize by trying to use that example to show YHWH as the Devil you literally opened yourself up to a massive amount of hypocrisy correct? I mean you have just this Scripture as True by your own admission as you said the Devil took Him to the pinnacle and offered Him all the World, thats found in this Scripture, but how does Jesus respond Art? Does He say YHWH is the Devil get away!!! No instead He quotes the Old Testament and lets see what Jesus quotes to the Devil, your false god!

Deu 8:3 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live.

From whose mouth does the Word come from that Jesus says we live by? Oh yeah thats right, YHWH's mouth, why would Jesus be telling the Devil who you call YHWH that He lives off of every word from his mouth? He wouldnt, why? Because YHWH is God as Jesus just said and that He lives by every word that comes out of His mouth. Maybe you should start living by the Words that come out of His mouth too like Jesus said we should do brother...


Deu 6:16 Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.

What does LORD mean in that text Art? Whose God is Jesus speaking about here? The Devil or His God that we are not to Tempt? Jesus say dont tempt YHWH your God Art, why are you always tempting Him, I suggest you repent...

Deu 6:13 Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name.

Who do Jesus say we should fear and serve? Thats right YHWH, so please man explain to me the logic you are using to quote this Scripture saying the Devil tempted Jesus and the Temple is the Devils, but then how Jesus would appeal to the Old Testament, then quote it, then say not to Tempt, but rather live off of, fear and serve YHWH? If the Devil is YHWH, then why does Jesus keep quoting and appealing and saying we should live off fear and serve Him? Would Jesus appeal to something, ANYTHING else if that were the case?

He would, but He doesnt, why? Because YHWH is His God, and He wont Tempt Him, and instead He will live off His Word, Fear and Serve Him!!!

This is why I suggested you stop debating me about this issue, you will only continue to look hypocritical and over and over and over I will keep showing everyone that YHWH is the God of Jesus...

Everything he wrote basically, I mean I have shown you mutliple places in Scripture where they wrote of Jesus, why do you need me to keep showing you, why dont you Trust Jesus and then search the Scriptures yourself asking Him to reveal Himself to you? I guess you think Jesus is a liar, or John is a liar... Here is a list of dozens of Prophecies Christ fulfilled which make ZERO sense for Him to have done if the God of the Old Testament is the Devil.

http://www.accordingtothescriptures.org/prophecy/353prophecies.html


Try studying the Sacrificial System and how that is a foreshadowing of Christ, Ill start you off:

http://www.missionprinting.us/html_pubs/SacrificialSystem.html

Try studying the Holy Days and how they are all a foreshadowing of Christ. Ill help you again to start your journey if you really want to know the Truth:

https://oncedelivered.net/2008/08/25/jesus-in-the-feasts-of-israel-the-day-of-atonement-yom-kippur/

Try studying how the Temple is a foreshadowing of Christ:

https://blogs.universal.org/bispomacedo/en/2010/11/03/the-relationship-between-jesus-christ-and-the-temple/

Here is a Book that goes over EVERYTHING Moses wrote and how ALL of it reflects Christ:

https://frame-poythress.org/ebooks/the-shadow-of-christ-in-the-law-of-moses/

You can study the Priests and their Garments, they all reflect Christ, on and on and on I can go, its something you can spend a lifetime studying if you actually want to see the Truth man...

Who is the god of this world?
The one that blinds you from seeing the Truth:

2 Cor 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.
6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

What God is it that commanded the light to shine out of darkness Art? Hes found in the Old Testament, that would be YHWH brother, but the god of this world who is the Devil has blinded you from seeing this or anything to do with the True Gospel of Christ...

Gospel of Phillip:

Late-third-century Gnostic writing; one copy found at Nag Hammadi; not actually a gospel, but a collection of brief excerpts from other Gnostic writings; summarizes the views of followers of Gnostic leader Valentinus. Unlike many Gnostic documents, Gospel of Philip does not claim to have been written by an apostle; the book is called by his name simply because he is the only apostle mentioned in it.
Why should I care what a person 200 years after Jesus who had zero affiliation with any of the Disciples or Apostles has to say? Especially when they are linked to the Heretic Valentinus? No thanks, I have the Word of God that I know for a FACT is Divine and when I compare what that false not really a gospel say to the Word of God, there are marked contradictions, one is True one is False. This garbage is False...

Gospel of Mary Magdalene
Though much is unclear regarding the background of the Gospel of Mary, it is clear by the time period of its writing that it was not written by Mary Magdalene or any other Mary from the New Testament period. It was written two centuries after the New Testament. Further, unlike the New Testament documents, there are only two early Greek copies and one Coptic copy, each with missing texts.

The ideas of secret knowledge, alternative stories regarding biblical events, and mysterious statements about God, good and evil, and the afterlife regularly contradict or add additional material than exists in the New Testament narratives.
Again why do I want to take this garbage over the New Testament? None of the Marys were Disciples or Apostles plain and simple this forgery wants to say Magdalene (which we cant be clear it WAS her because it just says Mary) was Jesus greatest Disciple. She wasnt, Jesus picked the 12, then they cast lots for the replacement of Judas as recorded in Scripture. So should I trust and believe this garbage written over 100 years after Christ that contradict the Bible or the Bible?

Gospel of Truth
But the followers of Valentinus, putting away all fear, bring forward their own compositions and boast that they have more Gospels than really exist. Indeed their audacity has gone so far that they entitle their recent composition the Gospel of Truth, though it agrees in nothing with the Gospels of the apostles, and so no Gospel of theirs is free from blasphemy. For if what they produce is the Gospel of Truth, and is different from those which the apostles handed down to us, those who care to can learn how it can be show from the Scriptures themselves that [then] what is handed down from the apostles is not the Gospel of Truth. (3.11.9)
Amen! There is the one guy who destroys this entire false gospel, his name is Irenaeus, Ill stick to his reviews of this garbage, which is that it contradicts the Gospels handed down by the Apostles and is blasphemous. You however want to accept the blasphemy and reject the Truth...

 






Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,017
I literally just gave you a rebuttal to your point concerning Ex 32, and summed it up in one sentence, but you refused to read the article that articulates it in a much deeper fashion.
Your rebuttal was "The Most High is YHVH"? That's not a rebuttal. That's just stating the opposite of the general point in my article without disproving or arguing any of it.

El Elyon (as in Qumran) is not a name for YHVH because it is dated to pre-Mosaic times. It is an Ugaritic (ie. pre-Hebrew) name who in the Ugaritic texts (again, predating the Pentateuch) is the head of the divine council and divides the nations between his 70 sons, each son becoming the king of that nation while El remains ruler of the heavens. Again, the Ugaritic texts predate Moses' books, the name El Elyon predates Moses, and in Moses' book (the Qumran version) it says Yahweh was given Israel by El Elyon. In the Masoretic version more than a 1,000 years later, Yahweh is no longer a son, but he's the Most High keeping Israel to himself.

You can see the corruption of text with your naked eyes, a lower deity, a son of God, an angel, being promoted by the scribes to the position of the Most High.

I just read the first 10 pages of Heiser's article and it's unbelievable. A scientist's job when studying a problem is to look at it from as many angles and perspectives as required to see which one coherently explains it. He doesn't even consider the perspective that Yahweh is one of El Elyon's sons. He simply uses Genesis 10-11 as a backdrop to explain Israel is not counted as one of the 70 nations, so none of the Most High's sons get Israel ergo ... Yahweh is the Most High! Then he simply goes on to try and prove how the correct reading in Qumran of the "sons of God" doesn't necessarily mean the Israelite religion was polytheistic. Not really relevant here.

His article doesn't even question whether Yahweh isn't the Most High, as if it has never even crossed his mind. It is assumed before he begins his research, while his assumption is what blinds him. You should give him a shout and ask him: "Hey Heiser, re Deut 32:8-9, what if Yahweh isn't El but one of his 70 sons and Israel is one of the 70 nations? There's this crazy guy who has an article that claims that bs."


If you understand Polemics of the writers of the Bible they purposefully take other gods and use their titles to incorporate them into YHWH to show that YHWH is Supreme to all of them. To make the conclusion that El is a wholly different God is to undermine the multiple other times the phrase is used specifically to denote YHWH.
You're giving the answer here. Yes, YHWH is given titles and traits of other gods to establish his superiority over them. That's exactly what happened in other mythologies where lesser deities grew into the heads of pantheons.

My article mentions this phenomenon:

With regard to the origins of Judaism, one could consider the texts discovered in Ugarit as being closer to historical reality than biblical scripture. They have two major advantages. Firstly, they have been dated to 1500-1200 BC and are thus contemporaries of the time when people worshipped Yahweh, while the biblical texts concerning this period have been written during the Babylonian exile between 622-500 BC, nearly a millennium after the events they describe. Secondly, they lack ideological distortion. Indeed, analyses of biblical writings show that they have been extensively altered and redacted over the centuries to defend the dogmas of a nascent Jewish religion. It was about scribes wanting to show that the god Yahweh Almighty imposed himself in one fell swoop upon the Israelites as being the only God in the time of Moses, +/- 1300 BC.

As put by the archeologist Jean-Baptiste Humbert in 1997 (translated from French): “the discovery in Ugarit of another Canaanite literature [we knew only one: the Bible!] threw a vivid light on a religion close to that of ancient Israel. Many ideas adopted were shaken up. The celebrated Jerusalem was just a big block of houses, and the temples of the almighty Yahweh were no larger than sacristies. Israel proved to be but a remote province under the influence of its powerful neighbours, whose inhabitants were only trying to imitate the arts and manners.”

To make the conclusion that El is a wholly different God is to undermine the multiple other times the phrase is used specifically to denote YHWH.

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
21 And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.
22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the Lord, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,

There you go, very clear and blatant Scripture to prove my point, YHWH the Most High God!! EL is YHWH according to Scriptures, so your first problem is you have chosen to separate EL from YHWH, when as anyone who reads and studies the Old Testament knows, EL is YHWH. Same God...
This is about the Most High, I agree. But the Most High is EL, not YHWH. Melchizedek is priest of the Most High EL, not YHVH. I don't even know why you think this is proof that it's YHVH.

Speaking of Qumran scrolls and Melchisedek. You asked why the scribes wouldn't remove scripture that is tied to the coming of Christ. How then do you explain the absence of this manuscript:

II... And concerning that which He said, In [this] year ofJubilee [each of you shall return to his property (Lev. xxv, 13); and likewise, And this is the manner of release:] every creditor shall release that which he has lent [to his neighbour. He shall not exact it of his neighbour and his brother], for God's release [has been proclaimed] (Deut. xv, 2). [And it will be proclaimed at] the end of days concerning the captives as [He said, To proclaim liberty to the captives (Isa. lxi, 1). Its interpretation is that He] will assign them to the Sons of Heaven and to the inheritance of Melchizedek; f[or He will cast] their [lot] amid the po[rtions of Melchize]dek, who will return them there and will proclaim to them liberty, forgiving them [the wrong-doings] of all their iniquities. And this thing will [occur] in the first week of the Jubilee that follows the nine Jubilees. And the Day of Atonement is the e[nd of the] tenth [Ju]bilee, when all the Sons of [Light] and the men of the lot of Mel[chi]zedek will be atoned for. [And] a statute concerns them [to prov]ide them with their rewards. For this is the moment of the Year of Grace for Melchizedek. [And h]e will, by his strength, judge the holy ones of God, executing judgement as it is written concerning him in the Songs of David, who said, ELOHIM has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgement (Psalms lxxxii, 1). And it was concerning him that he said, (Let the assembly of the peoples) return to the height above them; EL (god) will judge the peoples (Psalms vii, 7-8). As for that which he s[aid, Howlong will you] judge unjustly and showpartiality to the wicked? Selah (Psalms lxxxii, 2), its interpretation concerns Belial and the spirits of his lot [who] rebelled by turning away from the precepts of God to ... And Melchizedek will avenge the vengeance of the judgements of God... and he will drag [them from the hand of] Belial and from the hand of all the sp[irits of] his [lot].And all the 'gods [of Justice'] will come to his aid [to] attend to the de[struction] of Belial. And the height is ... all the sons of God... this ... This is the day of [Peace/Salvation] concerning which [God] spoke [through Isa]iah the prophet, who said, [How] beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who proclaims peace, who brings good news, who proclaims salvation, who says to Zion: Your ELOHIM [reigns] (Isa. lii, 7). Its interpretation; the mountains are the prophets... and the messenger is the Anointed one of the spirit, concerning whom Dan[iel] said, [Until an anointed one, a prince (Dan. ix, 25)] ... [And he who brings] good [news] , who proclaims [salvation]: it is concerning him that it is written... [To comfort all who mourn, to grant to those who mourn in Zion] (Isa. lxi, 2-3). To comfort [those who mourn: its interpretation], to make them understand all the ages of t[ime] ... In truth ... will turn away from Belial... by the judgement of God, as it is written concerning him, [who says toZion] ; your ELOHIM reigns. Zion is ..., those who uphold the Covenant, who turn from walking [in] the way of the people. And your ELOHIM is [Melchizedek, who will save them from] the hand of Belial. As for that which He said, Then you shall send abroad the trump[et in] all the land (Lev. xxv, 9) ...


Short recap:

This manuscript is written, in Hebrew, about a hundred years before Christ. It, like no other, contains the following announcements:

- "every creditor shall release that which he has lent" = cancel debts (sin = debt) "for God's release [has been proclaimed]" = God will remove debt / sin.

- "liberty to the captives at the end of days" = captives because they're imprisoned. God will liberate / save them.

- "forgive them of all their inequities"

- "all the sons of Light and men of Melchizedek will be atoned for on the Day of Atonement".

- "Belial who rebelled against God's precepts" = Belial could be Baal, son of God. Baal: Semitic for LORD.

- "the day of salvation as Isaiah foretold."

- "the feet of the messenger who proclaims peace, who brings good news, who proclaims salvation" = good news = Gospel; and salvation.

- "messenger is the Anointed of the Spirit"

What book in the Old Testament can compare to this in terms of clear prophecies of our Saviour? And in such a short amount of text.


I agreed that this should be rendered the Sons of God, and that is pertaining to the Divine Council of which YHWH is the head of, not some other god. Ps 82 explains this in more detail:

Ps 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

This is clearly YHWH speaking as God, and He stands in the congregation of the mighty or the Divine Council and He is judging them according to how unjust they are.
See how you've not read the article? lol

Chapter 7: Baal, son of El addresses the exact same psalm and the exact same verses. First I thought you were rebutting something straight from the article (to my surprise!), but based on your argumentation, you clearly weren't.

I'll just copy-paste that part of Chapter 7 in this spoiler:

The identification of Yahweh with Ba’al-Hadad becomes blatant when comparing the Cycle of Ba’al with the biblical psalms. In the Cycle of Ba’al, El presides (at first) at the Divine Council. We can locate this supremacy of El in the Psalms of the OT:

God (El) standeth in the congregation of the mighty (Elohim); he judgeth among the gods. How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah. Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked. They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course. I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes. Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations. - Psalms 82

In a second time, the Cycle of Ba’al describes the ascension of Ba’al-Hadad in the Kingdom of Gods, after his victory against the dragon Yam, who symbolizes the ‘primordial ocean’. Ba’al-Hadad will thenceforth reign over a divine assembly impressed by his “terrific” victory, dethroning his father El. In an identical manner do the Sumerian texts describe how Ninurta dethrones his father Enlil at the divine council, following his victory against (among others) the primordial dragon (see eg. Return of Ninurta to Nippur).

In parallel with Ba’al-Hadad and Ninurta, the rest of the biblical psalms no longer represent a peaceful, regnant El in the divine council, but Yahweh ruling the assembly which is at awe for the conqueror of the primordial dragon, the son of El:

And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O LORD: thy faithfulness also in the congregation of the saints. For who in the heaven can be compared unto the LORD? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the LORD? God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are about him. O LORD God of hosts, who is a strong LORD like unto thee? or to thy faithfulness round about thee? Thou rulest the raging of the sea: when the waves thereof arise, thou stillest them. Thou hast broken Rahab in pieces, as one that is slain; thou hast scattered thine enemies with thy strong arm.

– Psalms 89:6-10

(Rahab originally means “the primordial ocean” or “primordial dragon” as clarified by the Jewish Encyclopedia, which wonders why Jewish exegetes deprived this name of his mythological character by explaining it as equivalent to “noise” or “tumult”.)

And isn’t the same hero addressed in the following stories?

For God is my King of old, working salvation in the midst of the earth. Thou didst divide the sea [Yam in the Hebrew texts] by thy strength: thou brakest the heads of the dragons [Tanninim in the Hebrew texts] in the waters. Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, and gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness. Thou didst cleave the fountain and the flood: thou driedst up mighty rivers [nahăr-ōwṯ in the Hebrew texts].

- Psalms 74, 12-15

What foe does rise against Ba´al, enemy against the Rider on the Clouds? Did I not demolish the darling of El, Yam the Sea? Did I not finish off Nahar the River the great god divine Rabim? Did I not snare the Dragon [tannanu], vanquish him? I did demolish the Wriggling Serpent, the Tyrant with Seven Heads;

- Baal Cycle (KTU 1.3 V 35)


You have created your own personal interpretation on everything, even Gnostics wouldnt accept most of what you propose. One minute your siding with Gnostics the next your completely rejecting basic Gnostic tenets, for example all creation is Evil. That is very basic Gnostic tenet, you dont adhere to this, youve created your own version
Sigh.

The Demiurge in Valentinianism

Introduction

Valentinus founded a school of speculative Christian theology in the second century AD. Because he and his followers drew a distinction between the true God and the creator of the world, they are classified by modern scholars as "Gnostics". In common with other Gnostics, they believed that the material world was created by a lesser deity which they call the Demiurge (literally "public craftsman").

However, the Demiurge in Valentinianism is quite different in character from the hostile creator figure familiar from other schools of Gnosticism. In the Sethian school, for example, the Demiurge is a hostile demonic force who creates the material world in order to trap the spiritual elements. In contrast, Valentinians "show a relatively positive attitude towards the craftsman of the world or god of Israel" (Layton 1987). Valentinians insisted that while the Demiurge may be a bit foolish, he certainly could not be considered evil. Instead, he has a role to play in the process of redemption.

The Valentinian teacher Ptolemy strongly criticizes non-Valentinian Gnostics who taught that the Demiurge was evil. In his view, those who view the creator as evil "do not comprehend what was said by the Savior...Only thoughtless people have this idea, people who do not recognise the providence of the creator and so are blind not only the eye of the soul but even in the eye of the body" (Letter to Flora 3:2-6). They are as "completely in error" as orthodox Christians who taught that the Demiurge was the highest God (Letter to Flora 3:2).

In contrast, he and other Valentinians steadfastly maintained that "the creation is not due to a god who corrupts but to one who is just and hates evil" (Letter to Flora 3:6). He carefully distinguished the Demiurge from both God and the Devil. According to Ptolemy, "he is essentially different from these two (God and the Devil) and is between them, he is rightly given the name, Middle" (Letter to Flora 7:4). He is "neither good nor evil and unjust, can properly be called just , since he is the arbitrator of the justice which depends on him" (Letter to Flora 7:5).


Why does Jesus call the House of YHWH, His Fathers house?
Same reasoning as "Hear o Israel, the Lord our God is one!" Jesus' God is everyone's God, right? Regardless of their faith in Him? If I make a child I'm his father regardless of who that child thinks is his father, right? Thus the statement "Israel, our God" is logically not false, since Jesus' God is Israel's God, even though Israel had been worshiping a different one.

Same with house of God. A house of God is a house of Jesus' Father, whether or not the people of that house are worshiping something else. If Jesus lived today He could walk in a synagogue or mosque and say the same thing without being false.


Does He say YHWH is the Devil get away!!! No
Why do you expect Jesus to explicitly say Yahweh when talking of or to the Devil, when you don't expect Jesus to explicitly say it when talking of or to his Father? Nowhere in any Christian manuscript is Yahweh mentioned by name. Jesus could've said: "yeah, Yawheh, El Elyon, El Shaddai, Yahu, ... that's my pops. I call him Yayo". Yet you expect him to say it when he's the devil. Pff, whatever.


From whose mouth does the Word come from that Jesus says we live by? Oh yeah thats right, YHWH's mouth
Sounds like El Elyon to be honest. Trust me, I'm a good judge of character. ;)


Here is a Book that goes over EVERYTHING Moses wrote and how ALL of it reflects Christ:
Okay, show me one.


Gonna repeat my other question too:
Who is the god of this world?
You ask me that question and I'll identify him in a dozen mythologies, by name. If Satan is the God of this World, who is he? What name is he hiding behind?
 






Last edited:

Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
Your rebuttal was "The Most High is YHVH"? That's not a rebuttal. That's just stating the opposite of the general point in my article without disproving or arguing any of it.
Again, why do you care if I argue these points exactly? I show you literally that YHWH is called EL and El is called YHWH but you want to act as tho I am not addressing what youve said?

El Elyon (as in Qumran) is not a name for YHVH because it is dated to pre-Mosaic times. It is an Ugaritic (ie. pre-Hebrew) name who in the Ugaritic texts (again, predating the Pentateuch) is the head of the divine council and divides the nations between his 70 sons, each son becoming the king of that nation while El remains ruler of the heavens. Again, the Ugaritic texts predate Moses' books, the name El Elyon predates Moses, and in Moses' book (the Qumran version) it says Yahweh was given Israel by El Elyon. In the Masoretic version more than a 1,000 years later, Yahweh is no longer a son, but he's the Most High keeping Israel to himself.
Polemics anyone?

I explained this, in the Bible the authors took the surrounding ideologies and wrote in such a manner to elevate their God above all of the surrounding gods so as to show to the other nations that their God is superior. If we found a text older than Ugaritic texts at some point that say there is yet some other god above El, does this make El a lower god than this new god? Or is it simply a common technique of writing done by all peoples during these times?

I just read the first 10 pages of Heiser's article and it's unbelievable. A scientist's job when studying a problem is to look at it from as many angles and perspectives as required to see which one coherently explains it. He doesn't even consider the perspective that Yahweh is one of El Elyon's sons. He simply uses Genesis 10-11 as a backdrop to explain Israel is not counted as one of the 70 nations, so none of the Most High's sons get Israel ergo ... Yahweh is the Most High! Then he simply goes on to try and prove how the correct reading in Qumran of the "sons of God" doesn't necessarily mean the Israelite religion was polytheistic. Not really relevant here.
Lol right not relevant because it negates your belief system? He uses the whole of the Bible and basic understanding of multiple different scriptures to show that this ideology is the framework of how YHWH the Most High operates. If you were to read the whole of the Old Testament instead of tiny bits and pieces in hopes to assert your made up Religion you would understand what he and I are trying to get across to you, but apparently you care little to nothing to see what we are saying, oh well...

. You should give him a shout and ask him: "Hey Heiser, re Deut 32:8-9, what if Yahweh isn't El but one of his 70 sons and Israel is one of the 70 nations? There's this crazy guy who has an article that claims that bs."
Why do you keep asking me to do something you clearly have the ability to? I linked you his website and how to contact him, if you are so desperate to have him critique your invented theology, why not man up and ask him yourself? Here is another explanation of how Scholars look at the Ugaritic writings and the surrounding Religions as an influence or opposition to the Biblical Writers.

First of all, it's important to understand that the biblical writers, though under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, followed the ordinary forms of literature that were current in their day when they wrote. If, for example, the biblical writer was describing a covenant treaty between God and his people, his description conforms in style to covenant treaties known elsewhere in the ancient world. To depart from this style would have seemed strange to the ancient readers: “What kind of covenant treaty is this? Didn’t this guy know how to write one?”

. Just as we wouldn't write a letter home to Mom and put footnotes in it, or jot down a recipe and lace it with legal mumbo-jumbo, so the biblical writers wrote using the literary conventions and forms that would be expected by their audience.

Biblical writers didn't just use the forms of contemporary non-inspired literature, they were also influenced by the literature itself.

Paul quotes from pagan Greek poets. The psalmists and prophets borrow vocabulary and paraphrase material from ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Syrian literature. Jude quotes a book from the Pseudepigrapha (ancient writings that falsely claim authorship by a biblical character). The people of biblical times knew the quoted material wasn't inspired, but it had meaning for them and their audience.

Religious Context. The religion of Ugarit and the religion of ancient Israel were not the same, but there were some striking overlaps. For example, the name of the ultimate divine authority at Ugarit was El, one of the names of the God of Israel (e.g., Gen 33:20). El was described as an aged god with white hair, seated on a throne. However, at Ugarit, El was sovereign, but another god ran things on earth for El as his vizier. That god’s name was Baal, a name quite familiar to anyone who has read the Old Testament. At Ugarit Baal was known by several titles: “king of the gods,” “the Most High,” “Prince Baal” (baal zbl), and—most importantly for our discussion—“the Rider on the Clouds.”

Baal’s position as “king of the gods” in Ugarit, Israel’s northern neighbor, helps explain the “Baal problem” in the Old Testament. Jereboam’s religion in the northern kingdom borrowed from Baal worship, and it soon began to look like there was no difference, or if there was a difference, they were so close that worshipping one or the other was just theological hair-splitting. This is what prophets like Elijah had to contend with. The people had no Bible. They had only the prophets and their words. When a prophet wasn’t around to set the record straight, it was easy to just do what the neighbors were doing—especially if your king didn’t care, or actually preferred it that way.

Given this state of affairs, it's not surprising that sometimes in the course of their preaching and writing, the prophets counted on familiarity with Baal to make their case that it was Yahweh, not Baal, who was the heavenly king. We know this was the case, since certain Old Testament books actually quote from the Ugaritic religious texts, most notably the one that modern scholars have called the Baal Cycle. Whereas the Baal Cycle would give Baal credit for things like sending rain and making the crops grow, the prophets would credit those things to Yahweh. The showdown at Carmel (geographically close to Ugarit) is a case in point. God had withheld rain and Elijah challenged the rain giver to a duel, which God won in glorious fashion (1 Kings 17-18).

The Bible can only be fully understood when properly situated within its ancient context..

Throughout the Ugaritic texts, Baal is repeatedly called “the one who rides the clouds,” or “the one who mounts the clouds.” The description is recognized as an official title of Baal. No angel or lesser being bore the title. As such, everyone in Israel who heard this title associated it with a deity, not a man or an angel.

Part of the literary strategy of the Israelite prophets was to take this well-known title and attribute it to Yahweh in some way. Consequently, Yahweh, the God of Israel, bears this descriptive title in several places in the Old Testament (Isaiah 19:1; Deuteronomy 33:26; Psalm 68:33; 104:3). For a faithful Israelite, then, there was only one god who “rode” on the clouds: Yahweh.

Until we hit Daniel 7, that is. You know the scene, but you likely don’t know the full context, since Ugaritic provides that for us:

9 As I looked on, the thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took His seat. His garment was like white snow, and the hair of His head was like lamb's wool. His throne was fiery flames; its wheels were blazing fire. 10 A river of fire streamed forth before Him; thousands upon thousands served Him; myriads upon myriads attended Him; the court sat and the books were opened . . . 13 As I looked on, in the night vision, One like a son of man came with the clouds of heaven; he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented to Him. 14 Dominion, glory, and kingship were given to him; all peoples and nations of every language must serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship, one that shall not be destroyed.

The plurality of thrones in the passage tell us plainly that we have here what scholars of the Hebrew Bible call a divine council scene — the high sovereign in his throne room, meeting with the heavenly host. The literature of Ugarit has many such scenes, and the biblical divine council and the council at Ugarit are very similar. In point of fact, the flow of Daniel 7 actually follows the flow of a divine council scene in the Baal Cycle:

Ugarit / Baal Cycle Daniel 7
(A) El, the aged high God, is the ultimate sovereign in the council. (A) The Ancient of Days, the God of Israel is seated on the fiery, wheeled throne (cf. Ezekiel 1). Like Ugaritic El, he is white haired and aged (“ancient”).
(B) El bestows kingship upon the god Baal, the Cloud-Rider, after Baal defeats the god Yamm in battle. (B) Yahweh-El, the Ancient of Days, bestows kingship upon the Son of Man who rides the clouds after the beast from the sea (yamma) is destroyed.
(C) Baal is king of the gods and El's vizier. His rule is everlasting. (C) The Son of Man is given everlasting dominion over the nations. He rules at the right hand of God.

The striking parallels are especially noteworthy given that this is the only time in the Old Testament where a second personage other than Yahweh is described as “coming with/upon the clouds” (the preposition in Aramaic can be translated either way). The intent of the author to describe this “son of man” with a title reserved only for Yahweh was clear by virtue of how the scene followed the Baal literature — the literary cycle whose central character, Baal, held the Cloud-Rider title!

The Jewish audience reading Daniel understood the implications — the prophet Daniel was describing a second power in heaven — a second being at the level of Yahweh to whom Yahweh himself granted authority. Although we naturally think of the idea of a godhead as distinctly Christian, we have evidence here that the seeds of the idea are found in the Hebrew Scriptures. It’s no accident that Jewish theological writing during the Intertestamental period is filled with references to the “second power in heaven” and attempts to figure out how to articulate what was going on in heaven in light of monotheism. Jewish writers speculated that the “second god” was the archangel Michael, or perhaps Gabriel. Some Jewish writers even wrote that Abraham or Moses occupied that position! For Christians the answer was obvious.

It is well known that Jesus’ favorite title for himself while on earth was “son of man.” The term means two things: (1) human being (Jesus enjoyed being human!), and (2) the deity figure to whom all authority was given. The latter usage is perfectly evident in Matthew 26, as Jesus stood before Caiaphas — someone who knew his Old Testament — waiting to fulfill his destiny on the cross. When asked to give the Sanhedrin a straight answer about who he was, Jesus quoted Daniel 7:

63 But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, “I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” 64 Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.” (ESV)

By quoting this passage, Jesus was making an overt, unmistakable claim to be deity—he in fact was the one who rides on the clouds. That this is no exaggerated interpretation is evident from Caiaphas’ reaction:

65 Then the high priest tore his robes and said, “He has uttered blasphemy. What further witnesses do we need? You have now heard his blasphemy.” (ESV)

The statement is only blasphemous if one is claiming to be the rider on the clouds. That idea may have been acceptable to Jews at the time, but it was simply intolerable that this man Jesus of Nazareth would claim to be the incarnation of the second power. What most of us might think is an odd answer, or even a deliberate deflection of Caiaphas’ demand, is the exact opposite. Jesus could not have been more blunt. He was the “second deity” of Daniel 7.

The Jews of the first century understood this well. They knew their Bible. The idea of a godhead was not a Christian innovation; it is rooted in Israelite religion and Jewish theology, and was acceptable doctrine for Jews until the second century A.D. when, in response to the worship of Jesus by Jews converting to Christianity, the rabbis declared the second power idea a heresy for faithful Jews.

Who would have suspected? We are able to see the beginnings of the Christian doctrine of the godhead in the Hebrew Bible with the help of the context supplied by the literature of Ugarit.
I hope you take the time to read that, it will give you a much deeper understanding of why the Hebrews incorporated Ugarit literature into their writings. Also the idea that you suppose is blatantly nonsensical if we simply grasp that you claim YHWH is Baal, yet the Bible makes it explicitly clear that YHWH and Baal are opposite Gods, one False and one True. Anyway read that and learn how Jesus quotes from the Old Testament to claim Himself Divine, the Second Power in Heaven, from a scene borrowed in Ugarit literature. If you understand what Jesus is saying in that verse, then either you MUST throw away your personal religion or now MUST say Jesus is the Devil...

This is about the Most High, I agree. But the Most High is EL, not YHWH. Melchizedek is priest of the Most High EL, not YHVH. I don't even know why you think this is proof that it's YHVH.
Are you blind?

22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the Lord, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,

YHWH, EL aka YWHW the Most High God, YHWH and EL are the same God out right stated in this text. The God of Melchizedek is the same as Abram, and we see CLEARLY that the God they are Worshiping is YHWH, The Most High God...

What book in the Old Testament can compare to this in terms of clear prophecies of our Saviour? And in such a short amount of text.
Lol I mean you do realize that that document is almost exclusively made up Old Testament quotes correct? How on Earth can this in any way bring merit to your ideology? All you did was just prove that the Old Testament is replete with Prophecies about Jesus. You are winning my argument for me.

So single this question out since I see you only answer about 1/5 of the things I pose to you:

How can a book about and written by Satan continually have hundres of Prophecies about Jesus?

Again you literally quoted over 10 Old Testament Scriptures and said they are about Christ, one of the most destructive to your own ideology would be:

And it was concerning him that he said, (Let the assembly of the peoples) return to the height above them; EL (god) will judge the peoples (Psalms vii, 7-8)

Ps 7:7 So shall the congregation of the people compass thee about: for their sakes therefore return thou on high.
8 The Lord shall judge the people: judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me.

Who is EL according to your own quoted source Art? Thats right YHWH, just go back and look at each quote, all of them say YHWH is God!!!

I mean lets see the ones you pointed out asking what Books contain these by your own admission Prophecies of Christ:

"every creditor shall release that which he has lent" "for God's release [has been proclaimed]"

Deu 15:2 And this is the manner of the release: Every creditor that lendeth ought unto his neighbour shall release it; he shall not exact it of his neighbour, or of his brother; because it is called the Lord's release.

Whose release is it, that is a Prophecy of Christ Art? Oh thats right, YHWHs, and who wrote this? Oh thats right, Moses...

liberty to the captives at the end of days

Is 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

Whose Spirit is upon Christ, who has anointed Him to preach good tidings and proclaim liberty to the captives? Oh thats right, YHWH...

forgive them of all their inequities"

Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Who is it that everyone will say they know? Who is it that will forgive their iniquities? Oh thats right, YHWH....

all the sons of Light and men of Melchizedek will be atoned for on the Day of Atonement".

Lev 16:30 For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the Lord.

Priest make atonement to cleanse us before who? Oh thats right, YHWH, also you know that the Day of Atonement is a Holy Day in Israel right?

Yom Kippur means "Day of Atonement" and refers to the annual Jewish observance of fasting, prayer and repentance. Part of the High Holidays, which also includes Rosh HaShanah, Yom Kippur is considered the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. In three separate passages in the Torah, the Jewish people are told, "the tenth day of the seventh month is the Day of Atonement.

https://reformjudaism.org/jewish-holidays/yom-kippur-day-atonement

Belial who rebelled against God's precepts" = Belial could be Baal, son of God. Baal: Semitic for LORD.

But thats not at all what its saying, its literally describing the exact passages we are talking about, when the sons of God rebelled against YHWH, I have quoted you the scene this is drawing from:

Ps 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

As for that which he s[aid, Howlong will you] judge unjustly and showpartiality to the wicked? Selah (Psalms lxxxii, 2), its interpretation concerns Belial and the spirits of his lot [who] rebelled by turning away from the precepts of God to

This is literally saying everything I am saying man, how do you not grasp this? Didnt I just quote this to you? Yes I did, wow...

"the day of salvation as Isaiah foretold."

- "the feet of the messenger who proclaims peace, who brings good news, who proclaims salvation" = good news = Gospel; and salvation.

Is 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

I mean if you would have bothered to read ANY of the links I provided especially the one that shows all the Prophecies of Jesus in the Old Testament, then you would have seen ALL of these Scriptures already quoted for you. And in each and everyone of them YHWH is mentioned within a few verses if not directly in the verse. I am glad to see that you reject your own thesis and have now finally come to the correct understanding which I have been saying all along, Jesus is the Anointed One of YHWH, the Messiah of YHWH, the Prophesied of YHWH, the Son of YHWH!!!

Also there is no need to mention Melchizedek to me, I have throughly studied the Old Testament, and I know that he is either outright Christ Himself, or he is a prototype of Christ, I mean you know Paul mentions him in relation to Jesus correct? But clearly Paul shouldnt be doing this, as the God of Abraham, is the Devil according to you:

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

What God called Aaron Art? Oh thats right YHWH did, and who does Paul call God? Oh thats right YHWH...

5:10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Im not gonna quote it all but read Chapter 7, so yes Art I actually agree with what you have shown, too bad that you cant agree with it unless you want to conclude your religion is a lie...

See how you've not read the article? lol

Chapter 7: Baal, son of El addresses the exact same psalm and the exact same verses. First I thought you were rebutting something straight from the article (to my surprise!), but based on your argumentation, you clearly weren't.
I have read the freaking article, Im not rebutting it, like I have said like 20 times, I dont remember everything you wrote in it, it was 2 months ago and then years prior.

Good now read what I quoted and see how it rebutts your claims...

Then why oh why have you admitted multiple times in the past that the thesis you have brought up isnt something that pretty much ANY other Gnostics would accept? These are out of your own mouth, but when I make the statements that you have created your own religion that most Gnostics would agree with you tend to sigh and get defensive. You admitted it just take ownership of it, you have now created the one true religion in your mind...

Jesus' God is everyone's God, right? Regardless of their faith in Him? If I make a child I'm his father regardless of who that child thinks is his father, right? Thus the statement "Israel, our God" is logically not false, since Jesus' God is Israel's God, even though Israel had been worshiping a different one.

Same with house of God. A house of God is a house of Jesus' Father, whether or not the people of that house are worshiping something else. If Jesus lived today He could walk in a synagogue or mosque and say the same thing without being false.
Are you freaking kidding me? Wow no, Jesus would not be saying YHWH is our God if YHWH was the Devil. And that is what the Scriptures say over and over, Jesus quotes the Old Testament Scriptures about Himself (like you just did) that specifically show that YHWH is God, the YHWH sent Him, that He is the fulfillment of YHWH ect ect ect...

Jesus God according to your false religion would NOT be Israels God because they are 2 different Gods, just as Jesus literally differentiated between children of the Devil and children of God. This is a very weak argument, it is the weakest argument you have ever written but I guess you had to pull some kinda garbage out your rear end to cope with the very blatant cognitive dissonance you face every time these Scriptures are shown to you...

Why do you expect Jesus to explicitly say Yahweh when talking of or to the Devil, when you don't expect Jesus to explicitly say it when talking of or to his Father? Nowhere in any Christian manuscript is Yahweh mentioned by name. Jesus could've said: "yeah, Yawheh, El Elyon, El Shaddai, Yahu, ... that's my pops. I call him Yayo". Yet you expect him to say it when he's the devil. Pff, whatever.
Dude again seriously? Jesus quotes YHWH against the Devil that is my point!! Why on Earth would Jesus be appealing to the Devil in Scriptures as a defense of the Devil in His face? Of course you have no answer for this because simple logic tells us Jesus would NEVER call on the Devil to fight the Devil...

Sounds like El Elyon to be honest. Trust me, I'm a good judge of character. ;)
Even tho it literally say YHWH, yeah buddy not only are you a bad judge of character you lack basic reading comprehension apparently...

Okay, show me one.
Why show you one Art? I listed 300+ Prophecies, I showed you that every Holy Day, the Temple itself, the garments of the Priest, ect ect ect all reflects Christ, why dont you just read for yourself? Why do I have to hold your hand and walk you thru it? And what is the point you are a hypocrite about all of this anyhow, just as you deny deny deny Jesus being in the Old Testament and then point me to a piece of literature that quotes verbatim the Old Testament and ask me where in the Old Testament there are Scriptures pointing to Jesus.

But heres one, Im not gonna break it down for you yet, but Passover, all of it is about Christ, even down to how the meal is prepared and eaten and even the rituals they do during the meal. Look it up if you care, but again EVERYTHING in the Old Testament is about Jesus, maybe you should believe Him, He is the one who declared it, who cares what I say...

You ask me that question and I'll identify him in a dozen mythologies, by name. If Satan is the God of this World, who is he? What name is he hiding behind?
Many, for example, Monad or Sophia or any titled Aeon for starters, what we do know he is not is YHWH...
 






Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,017
Are you blind?

22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the Lord, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,

YHWH, EL aka YWHW the Most High God, YHWH and EL are the same God out right stated in this text. The God of Melchizedek is the same as Abram, and we see CLEARLY that the God they are Worshiping is YHWH, The Most High God...
Did God (EL) present himself as YHVH to Abraham? When did "God" introduce himself as YHVH? Did he not tell Moses that he did not present himself as YHVH to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob? Did he not make himself known as YHVH for the first time, to Moses?

Why would God do that? Why would he hide his identity from the patriarch, or change his identity to Moses?
Why would God go by a name anyway? A name is given to you by your parents. Does God have parents? A name is given to you to set you apart from your equals. Does God have equals?

How can a book about and written by Satan continually have hundres of Prophecies about Jesus?
I'm going to say this for the LAST TIME. Remember it if you want to move forward. The OT is not written by Satan, it is not written by God. It is mythology written down by scribes who have blurred the lines, muddied the waters between:

1. the MOST HIGH (EL!!!!), Supreme of the Divine Council (!!!!!!), Lord of the Heavens (!!!!!), God of Eden (!!!!!!!!)

AND

2. SON of the MOST HIGH (!!!!!), BAAL (!!!!!!), FALLEN ANGEL (!!!!!!), PRINCE OF THIS WORLD (!!!!!!) YHWH (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) YHWH from the semitic root HWY = "To FALL" (interesting!!), "To BLOW" ("He who blows"; weather god, storm god, like BAAL) (interesting!!!!), "To DESIRE" (interesting!!)


The Israelites originated as Bronze Age Canaanites, but Yahweh does not appear to have been a Canaanite god,[12][13][Notes 1] and the explanation given in Exodus 3:14, ehyeh ašer ehyeh ("I Am that I Am"), is a late theological gloss invented to explain Yahweh's name at a time when the meaning had been lost.[14][15]

The head of the Canaanite pantheon was El, and one theory holds that the name Yahweh is a shortened form of el dū yahwī ṣaba’ôt, "El who creates the hosts", meaning the heavenly army accompanying El as he marched beside the earthly armies of Israel,[16]though this is purely speculative.[17] Yahweh's earliest possible occurrence, albeit unlikely,[18][19] is as a place-name, "land of Shasu of YHW", in an Egyptian inscription from the time of Amenhotep III (1402–1363 BCE),[20][21] the Shasu being nomads from Midian and Edom in northern Arabia.[22] In this case a plausible etymology for the name could be from the root HWY, which would yield the meaning "he blows", appropriate to a weather divinity.
Remember how you said no one supported the fringe Kenite Hypothesis back in the day? Now we're 5 years later and:

There is considerable but not universal support for the view that the Egyptian inscriptions refer to Yahweh.[24] This raises the question of how he made his way to the north.[25] The widely accepted Kenite hypothesis holds that traders brought Yahweh to Israel along the caravan routes between Egyptand Canaan.[26] The strength of the Kenite hypothesis is that it ties together various points of data, such as the absence of Yahweh from Canaan, his links with Edom and Midian in the biblical stories, and the Kenite or Midianite ties of Moses.[25] However, while it is entirely plausible that the Kenites, and others may have introduced Yahweh to Israel, it is unlikely that they did so outside the borders of Israel or under the aegis of Moses, as the Exodus story has it.
I have seen Yahweh's Wiki-page change in front of my eyes, from not having the Kenite Hypothesis, to having the Kenite Hypothesis, to removing the Kenite Hypothesis, to now being unthinkable of having it removed.


I mean you do realize that that document is almost exclusively made up Old Testament quotes correct? How on Earth can this in any way bring merit to your ideology?
It's not in defense of my ideology. It's in response to your question why the scribes didn't leave out all references to Jesus. This text is by far more prophetic than any other text in the OT, so why is it not in the Masoretic version? Why do Christians not know this text?


Belial who rebelled against God's precepts" = Belial could be Baal, son of God. Baal: Semitic for LORD.

But thats not at all what its saying, its literally describing the exact passages we are talking about, when the sons of God rebelled against YHWH, I have quoted you the scene this is drawing from:

Ps 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

As for that which he s[aid, Howlong will you] judge unjustly and showpartiality to the wicked? Selah (Psalms lxxxii, 2), its interpretation concerns Belial and the spirits of his lot [who] rebelled by turning away from the precepts of God to


This is literally saying everything I am saying man, how do you not grasp this? Didnt I just quote this to you? Yes I did, wow...
Lol, this is priceless. "Did I not just quote ... ?" Man, that passage has been in the article for 5 YEARS!!! And I'm saying it's EL who reigns in the Divine Council first, and it's BAAL / YAHWEH who rebels against him and takes his place after defeating the sea serpent. And all the reasons why it is YHVH (scriptural, archeological, mythological, comparative, linguistic, etc) who takes EL's place are given in the preceding and succeeding chapters.


Also there is no need to mention Melchizedek to me, I have throughly studied the Old Testament, and I know that he is either outright Christ Himself, or he is a prototype of Christ, I mean you know Paul mentions him in relation to Jesus correct? But clearly Paul shouldnt be doing this, as the God of Abraham, is the Devil according to you:
Where the F did I say that? I believe Jesus is of the line of Melchisedek. I believe Melchisedek is priest of the MOST HIGH. I believe Abraham's God was the MOST HIGH (although I favour allegorical interpretation of Genesis). I believe Jesus (the MAN) is the SON of the MOST HIGH (EL). NOT YHVH!

Last time I'm explaining this to you btw. If you can't get this straight then you're simply arguing in bad faith.


Dude again seriously? Jesus quotes YHWH against the Devil that is my point!!
Jesus is probably quoting EL against the Devil.

Of course you have no answer for this because simple logic tells us Jesus would NEVER call on the Devil to fight the Devil...
The entire OT is a struggle between EL (the Most High, father of the man Jesus) and Baal (Yahweh). The scribes have merged two, at first co-operative entities, later two competing entities, into one. They put all scripture in a jar together with EL and Baal, they gave it a good shake et voilà: The Old Testament.


Even tho it literally say YHWH
How - Where does it literally say YHVH?


Why show you one Art?
I asked you to show me one example of what Jesus said that "Moses wrote of Him". It's a lot easier to show me 1 than 300+.

Show me something about Passover that writes of Jesus then. Anything. I'm not gonna do your homework. I ask for a simple piece of evidence.

You know Passover (to Pass Over) celebrates YHVH "passing over" the Jews to kill Egyptian babies, right?


Many, for example, Monad or Sophia or any titled Aeon for starters, what we do know he is not is YHWH...
Eesh ... Awful guess. Where is the Monad or Sophia in the Semitic pantheons? Or do the Semitic pantheons don't have a devil? What happened to Nimrod? Are you saying Sophia is Nimrod in disguise? Wow, what a revelation! lol


But truth be told, something good came out of your post though:
First of all, it's important to understand that the biblical writers, though under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, followed the ordinary forms of literature that were current in their day when they wrote. If, for example, the biblical writer was describing a covenant treaty between God and his people, his description conforms in style to covenant treaties known elsewhere in the ancient world. To depart from this style would have seemed strange to the ancient readers: “What kind of covenant treaty is this? Didn’t this guy know how to write one?”

. Just as we wouldn't write a letter home to Mom and put footnotes in it, or jot down a recipe and lace it with legal mumbo-jumbo, so the biblical writers wrote using the literary conventions and forms that would be expected by their audience.

Biblical writers didn't just use the forms of contemporary non-inspired literature, they were also influenced by the literature itself.

Paul quotes from pagan Greek poets. The psalmists and prophets borrow vocabulary and paraphrase material from ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Syrian literature. Jude quotes a book from the Pseudepigrapha (ancient writings that falsely claim authorship by a biblical character). The people of biblical times knew the quoted material wasn't inspired, but it had meaning for them and their audience.

Religious Context. The religion of Ugarit and the religion of ancient Israel were not the same, but there were some striking overlaps. For example, the name of the ultimate divine authority at Ugarit was El, one of the names of the God of Israel (e.g., Gen 33:20). El was described as an aged god with white hair, seated on a throne. However, at Ugarit, El was sovereign, but another god ran things on earth for El as his vizier. That god’s name was Baal, a name quite familiar to anyone who has read the Old Testament. At Ugarit Baal was known by several titles: “king of the gods,” “the Most High,” “Prince Baal” (baal zbl), and—most importantly for our discussion—“the Rider on the Clouds.”

Baal’s position as “king of the gods” in Ugarit, Israel’s northern neighbor, helps explain the “Baal problem” in the Old Testament.Jereboam’s religion in the northern kingdom borrowed from Baal worship, and it soon began to look like there was no difference, or if there was a difference, they were so close that worshipping one or the other was just theological hair-splitting. This is what prophets like Elijah had to contend with. The people had no Bible. They had only the prophets and their words. When a prophet wasn’t around to set the record straight, it was easy to just do what the neighbors were doing—especially if your king didn’t care, or actually preferred it that way.

...
After all this time, you are finally entering the actual debate. I find it ironic though, that you come up with an explanation of something you discarded completely before, telling me that I have to go with that explanation when I considered that explanation .... ummmm ... 6-7 years ago.

I've read it once, I'll read it again, more slowly next time, and give you a feedback. Just hang tight!
 






Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
@JoChris I hope you can at least grasp the irony in what you wrote there.

@Aero yeah that's a good one. It's unfortunate that hardly anyone had any clue what he meant, let alone the layers of meaning. People are so sure that we're the ones waiting for Jesus while he is really waiting for us.
Some know. It is hidden in plain sight.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

The Churches never quote those as they free the believer from organized religion and that is the last thing a church wants.

Here is the slightly longer version that shows the real way Jesus taught.


Regards
DL
 






Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
The Gospel of Thomas is not in the bible for obvious reasons.
.
True but what I just put above is.

You are like the old lawyers.

Luke 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Get thee behind me Satan.

Regards
DL
 






Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
"8And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them." - Real Jesus
John 5:31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. --- Real Jesus

John 8;14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true:
--- Real Jesus

Which one are you going to believe?

Regards
DL
 






Top