home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.paranormal      The paranormal and unexplained      34,291 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 33,472 of 34,291   
   None to Vincent Maycock   
   Re: DNA Proves Humans Are NOT An Acciden   
   23 Sep 25 18:03:54   
   
   [continued from previous message]   
      
   blessings or choose curses, default is the world you were born into.   
   >   
   >   
   > > > > > > Mat 27:24 When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, butthat   
   rather   
   > > > > > > a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the   
   > > > > > > multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person:   
   see ye to it.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > Baloney.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > The story is well known, as is the story of what his wife saw In a   
   dream   
   > > > > and relayed to him at the trial.   
   > > >   
   > > > It is well-known, but it's probably apocryphal.   
   > >   
   > > Any excuse to justify the choices you make.   
   >   
   > How is "apocryphal" an excuse?   
      
   You were avoiding accepting the uncontested truth.   
      
   >   
   >   
   > > > > > > Mat 27:25 Then answered all the people, and said, His bloodbe on   
   us, and   
   > > > > > > on our children.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > Which is exactly what the early Christian church *wanted* them to   
   have   
   > > > > > said, so they could more easily differentiate themselves from their   
   > > > > > Jewish beginnings and neighbors.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > The early church were jewish believers in Christ, and their relatives   
   who   
   > > > > did   
   > > > > not believe in Jesus they for certain did not want them to be   
   alienated.   
   > > > > You   
   > > > > are just blowing smoke, speaking things without thinking and with a   
   knee   
   > > > > jerk   
   > > > > reaction. The church you were mosr familiar with was no more related to   
   > > > > Jesus   
   > > > > than the JW. And to take those ideas and place that understanding on   
   other   
   > > > > is a great error.   
   > > >   
   > > > No, they wanted to go beyond Judaism. That's why they argued that   
   > > > Jewish ceremonial laws like kosher food didn't apply to Christians and   
   > > > newly converted Gentiles.   
   > >   
   > > Yet they rigidly followed the Law Covenant in most areas. We have already   
   > > discussed that in part, not long ago. What did they know about Grace? And   
   > > why have many departed from them?   
   >   
   > But they began to throw off the Jewish yoke, as it were, as they began   
   > to see themselves as Christians and not theological Jews. And grace   
   > without works is dead, to paraphrase the book of James.   
      
   There was no jewish yoke. They signed up, and at the time of Christ both the   
   northern and the southern tribes both had divorced themselves from God,   
   choosing the gods of this earth and abandoned Him. Only a small remnant   
   remained faithful to God.   
      
   As to James, it does not say what you claimed. It said that Faith without   
   works is dead.   
   >   
   >   
   > > > > > > > > The priests were the ones who stirred up the population   
   against Jesus.   
   > > > > > > > > Not   
   > > > > > > > > all, as there were some who were followers of Jesus secretly.   
   The High   
   > > > > > > > > Priest   
   > > > > > > > > of Israel at the time of the birth of Jesus believed that the   
   Messiah   
   > > > > > > > > was   
   > > > > > > > > coming, were looking for him, and even recognized Jesus as the   
   Messiah   
   > > > > > > > > when   
   > > > > > > > > he was presented to them soon after his birth, and they   
   rejoiced. John   
   > > > > > > > > the   
   > > > > > > > > Baptist Was a cousin of his, who grew up not knowing Jesus   
   personally.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > No, crucifixion is a quintessentially Roman mode of execution. It   
   > > > > > > > wasn't the Jews who stirred up the population against Jesus, but   
   the   
   > > > > > > > Roman authorities. Jesus' claim to be the Messiah was politically   
   > > > > > > > dangerous enough for the Romans to look into the situation,   
   found that   
   > > > > > > > he was indeed guilty of sedition, and executed him for that   
   reason.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > Mat 27:1 When the morning was come, all the chief priests and   
   elders of   
   > > > > > > the   
   > > > > > > people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > Mat 27:2 And when they had bound him, they led him away, and   
   delivered   
   > > > > > > him   
   > > > > > > to Pontius Pilate the governor.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > If you were to go to the source, like here and the scriptures   
   > > > > > > surrounding   
   > > > > > > it, you would see a far different picture.   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > An interesting quote. However, it carries no weight for those who   
   > > > > > don't accept the Bible as being inspired.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Of course not. Especially when you are afraid to read and understand   
   what   
   > > > > the   
   > > > > Word of God really says so that you can discuss things intelligently   
   even   
   > > > > if   
   > > > > you chose not to follow it. Ghandi was such a person. Agrippa in the   
   days   
   > > > > of   
   > > > > Paul was like that as well.   
   > > >   
   > > > Not at all. I've read the Bible in its entirety, as I've probably   
   > > > told you before, even taking notes as I went. But unlike you, I've   
   > > > read what *scholars say* about the Bible as well.   
   > >   
   > > What scholars? And of which denominations? You may have read it once all   
   the   
   > > way through, but for what reason, purpose, an what did you take out of it?   
   >   
   > Raymond E. Brown, for one. And Bible scholars of the   
   > literary-critical persuasion don't need to approach the Bible from   
   > the viewpoint of any denomination.   
      
   Yet they do.   
   He a RC Priest was a specialist on the hypothetical Johannine community,   
   which he speculated contributed to the authorship of the Gospel of John....   
   Blah blah blah.   
   That is not a bible scholar. You are just throwing stuff up against a wall in   
   the hopes that it sticks.   
      
   You must be bored to death, and desire to be recognized by someone. Hence all   
   the nonsense. Well let me tell you about someone who really cares about you,   
   even before you were Born, and that is Jesus Christ, who died for you so that   
   you might have peace, not the peace of this world but a peace that goes   
   beyond the mind of man to comprehend. Take advantage of that while you are   
   still living.   
      
   >   
   >   
   > > I may have read more “scholars” writings than you, as well as bible   
   > > commentators as well. I know the strengths and weaknesses of many. But I   
   > > would far rather base my understanding upon the words of God, learn what he   
   > > has to say, and make it mine, Than to use the words of others. Yet I have   
   > > used the words of others many times, for a variety of reasons. One being to   
   > > show what others say so that they might know and understand that it is not   
   > > just my understanding. That others know the same as well as more than I.   
   > > People sometimes turn against the message because of the messenger. I have   
   > > seen that happen on more than one occasion when my entire reply to a   
   > > question   
   > > or two was answered solely by quoting the Bible and what it said that would   
   > > answer their questions. Yet their response was against it because it was my   
   > > interpretation of the scripture. In spite of the fact that they fully knew   
   > > it was a direct quote.   
   >   
   > You've read Biblical scholarship but have never heard of the Suffering   
   > Servant?   
      
   Only vaguely, and it was never a biblical expression.   
      
   Not that it matters, it is only theological, meaning from the mind of men,   
   not God.   
      
   >   
   > > There are many better versed with the word of God than I. But what I do   
   know,   
   > > I know. Because of experiences, trust, and the leading of the Lord. And I   
   am   
   > > happy and very content to follow his lead. And learn new things.   
   >   
   > There's no reason to believe the Lord is leading you.   
      
   You have no way of determining that. You have not had an experiential   
   relationship with God so as to know one way or the other, as you have been   
   shunning that your entire life.   
   >   
   > > >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca