Arabia and the Bible

Alex22 · Aug 8, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
Homer never claimed to be writing prophecy! The Bible is (claimed to be) a book of prophecy because the writers claim to be speaking the words of God, and do not claim the inspiration as their own.

The problem with arguing that the Bible took its history from the Sumerians is that the Bible goes back to times before the flood, to people and places before the deluge. But if the event was as widespread as the Bible indicates, then it should come as no surprise that stories of the flood should appear after the flood, in later legends.

And here we meet with another problem for the sceptic. The acceptance of Noah's flood is found in lsaiah [54:9], and in the words of Jesus [Matthew 24:37] and Peter [1 Peter 3:20]. So, in denying the flood one makes all three men liars and false prophets (given they were speaking prophetically).

As for the story of Adam and Eve, l think it fair to say that modern man must have an original starting point. If you claim that homo sapiens sapiens has multiple points of origin, then l'm going raise some serious questions about racial differences. Which strands of humanity have existed the longest? Which strands have the most developed brains and intellect? Which strands are superior?

Can you see where this is leading?

The Bible, and l believe genetics supports its teaching, states clearly that all humanity come from a comnon pool. As such, we are all brothers and sisters, removed. We are all, lMO, the sons of Adam, through Noah and his family.

When it comes to supernatural events in the Bible, l don't believe we should be surprised to find them. God is supernatural, and the central figure of Christ brings, lMO, the supernatural into our midst. This is not just something l believe. I have personally witnessed God's supernatural power of healing.

As for Jonah and the whale, let's first recognise that Jonah died and was dead in the the belly of the great fish (whatever it was). He was spewed up alive. And the reason Jesus refers people to the story is to prophesy his own three days and nights in the grave. The resurrection from the dead then becomes a central feature of the revelation of God to man. It's to be understood as a literal event, seen by witnesses.

IMO.

I don't see why anyone believe should believe that the Bible is the word of god, just a bunch of people claim it is with no evidence. Cultures take from other cultures all the time, so I don't believe you that the Hebrews did not take it from the Mesopotamians because the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians were the dominant cultures of the region at the time.
Cultures have stories of floods because civilizations tend to settle by bodies of of water like lakes, oceans and rivers where it obviously floods but there was no worldwide flood. Christian geologists in the 19th century showed that there was no worldwide flood. So can't say I believe you.

Sure, humanity had a starting point but it was never just two individuals, so is humanity a big result of incest then?. Evolution does not recognize racial differences, we are all homo sapien sapiens. Are you trying to accuse Evolution of being racist or something because I have heard that argument before and it does not work in the slightest. Why believe your myths so literally? it is not a virtue, especially when it contradicts science, humans could not survive after being swallowed by the whale because they digested. The stories of the Bible sound nidicolous especially when one tries to say that the stories of Bible are somehow part of reality and are literal. I don't take my myths literally, they are meant to teach a lesson in something.

2ndpillar · Aug 9, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
Where did you gather this information? Sows it have anything to do with Jay Smith?

The question that bothers me is how subsequent history of the spread of Islam fits with your explanation.

Jay Smith does not agree with all of the above information, but interviews many actual scholars, who give supporting evidence to their differing points of view. I am simply a student of history, with a major in engineering, which provides practice in adding numbers, such as 2 pus 2, which generally equals 4, except in todays world, which would conclude that four would be a racist answer. The Quran is a compilation of stories taken largely from Jews, Christians, and Zoroaster. The elephants in Mecca is simply a copy of text from the book of Maccabee, whereas the Seleucid empire put down the Maccabee revolt in Jerusalem using elephants, and not in Mecca. Jerusalem was the original site of the holy of holies (Kaaba) As for the trade routes, the bulk of the trade in the 7th century was by dow, and was on the African side of the sea. The land trade through Medina at that time was limited mostly to animal products, and had nothing to do with Mecca, which was not on the trade route or any trade map. An Egyptian based Roman army marched through the area of Mecca to conquer Yemen, and the historian of the time denoted the area as a barren desert, and not a place of canals and fruit trees as described in the Quran. Islam was promoted by the sword and tax policy, and held by the men thinking they would have 72 virgins (raisons/dates) in a paradise forever. Somewhat like Christianity, except for the 72 virgins, and they had to pay a 10% tax to the church to gain earthly wealth.

Redemptionsong · Aug 9, 2021

Alex22 said:
I don't see why anyone believe should believe that the Bible is the word of god, just a bunch of people claim it is with no evidence. Cultures take from other cultures all the time, so I don't believe you that the Hebrews did not take it from the Mesopotamians because the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians were the dominant cultures of the region at the time.
Cultures have stories of floods because civilizations tend to settle by bodies of of water like lakes, oceans and rivers where it obviously floods but there was no worldwide flood. Christian geologists in the 19th century showed that there was no worldwide flood. So can't say I believe you.

Sure, humanity had a starting point but it was never just two individuals, so is humanity a big result of incest then?. Evolution does not recognize racial differences, we are all homo sapien sapiens. Are you trying to accuse Evolution of being racist or something because I have heard that argument before and it does not work in the slightest. Why believe your myths so literally? it is not a virtue, especially when it contradicts science, humans could not survive after being swallowed by the whale because they digested. The stories of the Bible sound nidicolous especially when one tries to say that the stories of Bible are somehow part of reality and are literal. I don't take my myths literally, they are meant to teach a lesson in something.

You claim the Bible is without evidence, but the internal integrity of scripture suggests otherwise.

The Church, which exists to this day, can trace its existence back to Jesus Christ, whose life is well attested. Do you doubt this?

Prior to the Christian Church, we have a history of lsrael, a people who were guardians of God's prophetic word. Do you doubt this?

You seem prepared to accept the archaeological evidence which provides an historical framework for God's revelation. Which parts do you not accept?

Redemptionsong · Aug 9, 2021

2ndpillar said:
Jay Smith does not agree with all of the above information, but interviews many actual scholars, who give supporting evidence to their differing points of view. I am simply a student of history, with a major in engineering, which provides practice in adding numbers, such as 2 pus 2, which generally equals 4, except in todays world, which would conclude that four would be a racist answer. The Quran is a compilation of stories taken largely from Jews, Christians, and Zoroaster. The elephants in Mecca is simply a copy of text from the book of Maccabee, whereas the Seleucid empire put down the Maccabee revolt in Jerusalem using elephants, and not in Mecca. Jerusalem was the original site of the holy of holies (Kaaba) As for the trade routes, the bulk of the trade in the 7th century was by dow, and was on the African side of the sea. The land trade through Medina at that time was limited mostly to animal products, and had nothing to do with Mecca, which was not on the trade route or any trade map. An Egyptian based Roman army marched through the area of Mecca to conquer Yemen, and the historian of the time denoted the area as a barren desert, and not a place of canals and fruit trees as described in the Quran. Islam was promoted by the sword and tax policy, and held by the men thinking they would have 72 virgins (raisons/dates) in a paradise forever. Somewhat like Christianity, except for the 72 virgins, and they had to pay a 10% tax to the church to gain earthly wealth.

How do Muslims react to this information? Is it discussed openly?

It appears to me that there are very few Muslims on RF prepared to discuss the authority of the Qur'an.

Harel13 · Aug 9, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
It appears to me that there are very few Muslims on RF prepared to discuss the authority of the Qur'an.

That's at least partly because there are very few (active) Muslims on RF, period...

2ndpillar · Aug 9, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
How do Muslims react to this information? Is it discussed openly?

It appears to me that there are very few Muslims on RF prepared to discuss the authority of the Qur'an.

They haven't react well. In the UK, some poor apostate Muslim lady noted that she bought 36 different versions of the Quran in Muslim cities around the world, and for her trouble someone tried to take a knife to her face and or throat. The Muslim penalty for apostacy is death. Plus she is now a Trinitarian "Christian", which would make her an idolater, who comes under the same penalty of death. As she has pointed out at least 92,000 different variants in the Qurans she has purchased, and the Quran says that the Quran is under the protection of Allah, there is a big problem, but only the western Muslim scholars are now admitting that there are variants, after recent previous statements that not one word has been changed. There is an open discussion in London every Sunday, but the Christians, had best be prepared to take some physical abuse, with no help from the police. Her message is against the foibles of the Quran, but she apparently holds onto the foibles of the NT. Jay Smith, her friend, grounded his false notion of a Trinity on Matthew 28:19, but Matthew 28:19 is simply a later addition, the same kind of problem he identifies with the Muslim Quran. It is hard to point out foibles, when you are grounded in them yourself.

Redemptionsong · Aug 9, 2021

2ndpillar said:
They haven't react well. In the UK, some poor apostate Muslim lady noted that she bought 36 different versions of the Quran in Muslim cities around the world, and for her trouble someone tried to take a knife to her face and or throat. The Muslim penalty for apostacy is death. Plus she is now a Trinitarian "Christian", which would make her an idolater, who comes under the same penalty of death. As she has pointed out at least 92,000 different variants in the Qurans she has purchased, and the Quran says that the Quran is under the protection of Allah, there is a big problem, but only the western Muslim scholars are now admitting that there are variants, after recent previous statements that not one word has been changed. There is an open discussion in London every Sunday, but the Christians, had best be prepared to take some physical abuse, with no help from the police. Her message is against the foibles of the Quran, but she apparently holds onto the foibles of the NT. Jay Smith, her friend, grounded his false notion of a Trinity on Matthew 28:19, but Matthew 28:19 is simply a later addition, the same kind of problem he identifies with the Muslim Quran. It is hard to point out foibles, when you are grounded in them yourself.

You say 'false notion of a trinity', but I too hold to the belief that there is 'One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.' [Ephesians 4:6] Do you not believe this?

2ndpillar · Aug 9, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
How do Muslims react to this information? Is it discussed openly?

It appears to me that there are very few Muslims on RF prepared to discuss the authority of the Qur'an.

The "authority" of the Islamic traditions is suspect as well. Written in mostly the 9th and 10th century by sons of Persians, in the land of former Persia, as in present day Iraq, using many stories copied from different cultures. Apparently the Arabs wanted a sustaining empire, and looked at the Jews, and decided they needed a book, and simply put scraps of other texts together with narratives from other people and places, and presto, they have their empire. They could have had the help of the monk Gabriel, of the Saint Kathrine monastery, near Mount Sinai, who according to Islamic tradition, met this MHMD guy when MHMD was 12 years old. Add some magic chain mail, with some quick horses, along with sharp swords, a weighted tax system, and there you go. Apparently, their grip on the narrative has slipped in some western countries. As women in Malaysia have many of the rights of men, I think their narrative has crumbled in many Islamic countries as well. As the prince of Arabia wants to erase some of the traditions in order to come into the 21st century, I think even some Arab leadership sees the crumbling foundation of their religion. Any house built on sand will fall, which includes the churches of Peter and Paul, the "Christian" churches. (Matthew 7). Both the Islamic and Christian religion preach the coming day of judgment, and both think they are immune. I think reality will over take both parties. It would also topple those sitting on the fence. Truth is sought, and not spoon fed or bought.

2ndpillar · Aug 9, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
You say 'false notion of a trinity', but I too hold to the belief that there is 'One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.' [Ephesians 4:6] Do you not believe this?

There is one God, the Father, the LORD, who is separate from the coming king (Hosea 3:5 & Ezekiel 37:24-28 & Ezekiel 34:20-23). As for the supposed writer of Ephesians, that would be the false prophet Paul, the teacher of lawlessness (gospel of Grace), who Yeshua called out in Matthew 7:13-23. Both he, Peter and Judas Iscariot were called out in Zechariah 11. Peter being the "worthless shepherd" called "Cords", and Paul called "Favor", as in his false gospel of grace, as being in God's favor, and striking down the covenant with "all the peoples", the covenant given given to Abraham (circumcision) (Zechariah 11:10). Paul's writings would be the "tare seed", the message of the "devil", planted right next to the good seed, the message of the son of man (Matthew 13:37-41). It is the "many" who follow the false prophets to "destruction" (Matthew 7:13). One either heeds the message of Yeshua, which is the Law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17-18) or they follow the false prophets to "destruction". There are many sons of God (Job & Genesis), but only one will be king in Jerusalem, who the nations will have to bow down to (Zechariah 14:17). As for Paul's message, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth, a Jew to the Jews, and a Gentile to the Gentiles. But his message is the message of the serpent, which is "you surely shall not die" (Genesis 3:4). Everyone one will die for their own iniquities (Jeremiah 31:30). Either Jeremiah is lying, or the false prophet Paul and the father of lies, the devil is lying. Your choice.

Redemptionsong · Aug 10, 2021

2ndpillar said:
There is one God, the Father, the LORD, who is separate from the coming king (Hosea 3:5 & Ezekiel 37:24-28 & Ezekiel 34:20-23). As for the supposed writer of Ephesians, that would be the false prophet Paul, the teacher of lawlessness (gospel of Grace), who Yeshua called out in Matthew 7:13-23. Both he, Peter and Judas Iscariot were called out in Zechariah 11. Peter being the "worthless shepherd" called "Cords", and Paul called "Favor", as in his false gospel of grace, as being in God's favor, and striking down the covenant with "all the peoples", the covenant given given to Abraham (circumcision) (Zechariah 11:10). Paul's writings would be the "tare seed", the message of the "devil", planted right next to the good seed, the message of the son of man (Matthew 13:37-41). It is the "many" who follow the false prophets to "destruction" (Matthew 7:13). One either heeds the message of Yeshua, which is the Law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17-18) or they follow the false prophets to "destruction". There are many sons of God (Job & Genesis), but only one will be king in Jerusalem, who the nations will have to bow down to (Zechariah 14:17). As for Paul's message, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth, a Jew to the Jews, and a Gentile to the Gentiles. But his message is the message of the serpent, which is "you surely shall not die" (Genesis 3:4). Everyone one will die for their own iniquities (Jeremiah 31:30). Either Jeremiah is lying, or the false prophet Paul and the father of lies, the devil is lying. Your choice.

I disagree strongly with your interpretation of scripture.

If you accept Yeshua, Jesus, as the Jewish Messiah (Suffering Servant), then it follows that you should accept Peter and Paul as apostles.

Did Jesus not choose Peter? Did Jesus not choose Paul?

2ndpillar · Aug 11, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
I disagree strongly with your interpretation of scripture.

If you accept Yeshua, Jesus, as the Jewish Messiah (Suffering Servant), then it follows that you should accept Peter and Paul as apostles.

Did Jesus not choose Peter? Did Jesus not choose Paul?

If you read Zechariah 11, it was the "LORD my God" who chose the "three shepherds", who were to "pasture" the "flock doomed to slaughter" (church of Peter and Paul), and one of the three was Judas Iscariot (Zechariah 11:13) as shown in Matthew 27:9-10. Keep in mind, that the Roman church version changes the source to Jeremiah, who is never mentioned any Jeremiah prophecy with regard to Judas. Also keep in mind that according to Matthew 5:17, it will be Yeshua who brings all this about. Yeshua points out the "stumbling block"/Peter (Matthew 16:23) and "those who commit lawlessness" (Paul), in Matthew 13:41, will reign until the end of the age (Matthew 13:30), at which time, they and their followers will be exposed and thrown into the furnace of fire (Matthew 13:42) whereas there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth". It is the "many" who go down the broad path to "destruction", not the few, who actually enter into life, which is in the here and now (Matthew 6:33). As for who chose Paul, according to the self witness of Paul, who was the only one who could see or hear the event, it was an angel of light, who according to Paul, is a vehicle of Satan. As to what Yeshua says, he said any self witness is not true (John 5;31). As for Luke's differing accounts, this unknown character Luke, said he witnessed nothing

Redemptionsong · Aug 11, 2021

2ndpillar said:
If you read Zechariah 11, it was the "LORD my God" who chose the "three shepherds", who were to "pasture" the "flock doomed to slaughter" (church of Peter and Paul), and one of the three was Judas Iscariot (Zechariah 11:13) as shown in Matthew 27:9-10. Keep in mind, that the Roman church version changes the source to Jeremiah, who is never mentioned any Jeremiah prophecy with regard to Judas. Also keep in mind that according to Matthew 5:17, it will be Yeshua who brings all this about. Yeshua points out the "stumbling block"/Peter (Matthew 16:23) and "those who commit lawlessness" (Paul), in Matthew 13:41, will reign until the end of the age (Matthew 13:30), at which time, they and their followers will be exposed and thrown into the furnace of fire (Matthew 13:42) whereas there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth". It is the "many" who go down the broad path to "destruction", not the few, who actually enter into life, which is in the here and now (Matthew 6:33). As for who chose Paul, according to the self witness of Paul, who was the only one who could see or hear the event, it was an angel of light, who according to Paul, is a vehicle of Satan. As to what Yeshua says, he said any self witness is not true (John 5;31). As for Luke's differing accounts, this unknown character Luke, said he witnessed nothing

IMO, there is absolutely no foundation to your argument.

Let's start with Peter, chosen as a disciple by Jesus [Matthew 4:18,19]. Peter was learning from Jesus, and at times was rebuked [Matthew16:23]. Nevertheless, he was not lost to Christ, despite his denials during Jesus' cross examination by the chief priests [Matthew 26:69-75]. Jesus' final words to Peter, spoken after Jesus' resurrection were 'follow thou me' [John 21 :22], which is exactly what he did, as the testimony of Acts records.

As for Paul, it is not just his personal record of the road to Damascus experience that cements his place as an apostle. Shortly after his blinding experience, a believer in Damascus, named Ananias, is called by Jesus to heal Paul and is told, 'Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name to the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of lsrael: For l will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.'

After conversion, Paul meets with the Christian believers in Jerusalem, and undergoes a thorough appraisal before being sent to Tarsus [Acts 9: 23-31].

IMO, once a person starts to deny scripture, the thread is pulled and the whole of scripture ends up being denied. I don't believe that you can make a valid case for Jesus Christ without accepting all the words of both testaments, Hebrew and Greek.

What do you believe to be true about Jesus?

2ndpillar · Aug 11, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
IMO, there is absolutely no foundation to your argument.

Let's start with Peter, chosen as a disciple by Jesus [Matthew 4:18,19]. Peter was learning from Jesus, and at times was rebuked [Matthew16:23]. Nevertheless, he was not lost to Christ, despite his denials during Jesus' cross examination by the chief priests [Matthew 26:69-75]. Jesus' final words to Peter, spoken after Jesus' resurrection were 'follow thou me' [John 21 :22], which is exactly what he did, as the testimony of Acts records.

As for Paul, it is not just his personal record of the road to Damascus experience that cements his place as an apostle. Shortly after his blinding experience, a believer in Damascus, named Ananias, is called by Jesus to heal Paul and is told, 'Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name to the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of lsrael: For l will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.'

After conversion, Paul meets with the Christian believers in Jerusalem, and undergoes a thorough appraisal before being sent to Tarsus [Acts 9: 23-31].

IMO, once a person starts to deny scripture, the thread is pulled and the whole of scripture ends up being denied. I don't believe that you can make a valid case for Jesus Christ without accepting all the words of both testaments, Hebrew and Greek.

What do you believe to be true about Jesus?

Yeshua is the "Word made Flesh", in as that he is the alpha and the omega, and that Word, the Law and the prophets will stay in place until "heaven and earth passes away" (Matthew 5:17-18). What is a lie, is the writings of some unknown writer of Hebrews 8:13, often taught to be Paul, who states "he made the first obsolete". The "Word" is not "obsolete", and will come back to "smite the nations (Gentiles)" (Revelation 19:15) at the end of the age. As for Ananias, wasn't a guy named Ananias killed by the holy spirit, oh no, or maybe the name of the high priest who said Yeshua must die. Who exactly passed down this second hand story to the unknown writer of Acts, upon whom you place your life? Was it but another self witness from Paul. There is no single canon accepted by all the churches, and certainly not an all inclusive dogma. The Trinity ranks high, but it was put in place by the beast with two horns like a lamb, the Roman Emperor Constantine, at his convened Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, and of course, his duty was to deceive "those who dwell on the earth" (Revelation 13:14). Your doctrines will most likely mostly mirror those of your particular sect, whose foundations are based on the harlot daughter of Babylon, the Roman church. If you look at the similarities of the abominations of Mithraism, the religion of Constantine's army, you will find they match pretty well. As for accepting "both testaments", well Paul pretty much nailed the law to his pagan cross idol. As for Peter, Yeshua quotes Zechariah 13:7 (Matthew 26:31). Zechariah 13:4 also refers to the false vision that Peter would have, and denotes it as the speaker being "ashamed of his vision". No, Peter is the "worthless shepherd" of Zechariah 11:17, who would not feed, care or tend the sheep, as later Yeshua asked Peter to do in John 21:16. Peter denied Yeshua three times, and said he loved Yeshua 3 times. I wouldn't go to the bank with any of Peter's statements. As for who wrote 2 Peter, who knows. That leaves Peter without any heritage, except for the pope, in which Isaiah 22:25 denotes in "that day", the day of the Lord, the guy claiming to hold the keys of David, will "fall", and anyone hanging on to him will fall also. No, I think you are holding a bad hand.

Redemptionsong · Aug 12, 2021

2ndpillar said:
Yeshua is the "Word made Flesh", in as that he is the alpha and the omega, and that Word, the Law and the prophets will stay in place until "heaven and earth passes away" (Matthew 5:17-18). What is a lie, is the writings of some unknown writer of Hebrews 8:13, often taught to be Paul, who states "he made the first obsolete". The "Word" is not "obsolete", and will come back to "smite the nations (Gentiles)" (Revelation 19:15) at the end of the age. As for Ananias, wasn't a guy named Ananias killed by the holy spirit, oh no, or maybe the name of the high priest who said Yeshua must die. Who exactly passed down this second hand story to the unknown writer of Acts, upon whom you place your life? Was it but another self witness from Paul. There is no single canon accepted by all the churches, and certainly not an all inclusive dogma. The Trinity ranks high, but it was put in place by the beast with two horns like a lamb, the Roman Emperor Constantine, at his convened Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, and of course, his duty was to deceive "those who dwell on the earth" (Revelation 13:14). Your doctrines will most likely mostly mirror those of your particular sect, whose foundations are based on the harlot daughter of Babylon, the Roman church. If you look at the similarities of the abominations of Mithraism, the religion of Constantine's army, you will find they match pretty well. As for accepting "both testaments", well Paul pretty much nailed the law to his pagan cross idol. As for Peter, Yeshua quotes Zechariah 13:7 (Matthew 26:31). Zechariah 13:4 also refers to the false vision that Peter would have, and denotes it as the speaker being "ashamed of his vision". No, Peter is the "worthless shepherd" of Zechariah 11:17, who would not feed, care or tend the sheep, as later Yeshua asked Peter to do in John 21:16. Peter denied Yeshua three times, and said he loved Yeshua 3 times. I wouldn't go to the bank with any of Peter's statements. As for who wrote 2 Peter, who knows. That leaves Peter without any heritage, except for the pope, in which Isaiah 22:25 denotes in "that day", the day of the Lord, the guy claiming to hold the keys of David, will "fall", and anyone hanging on to him will fall also. No, I think you are holding a bad hand.

You say that you accept the Law (Torah), and Prophets (Nevi'im). Do you also accept the Writings (Ketuvim), thereby accepting the whole of the Tanakh?

I then want to know which bits of the New Testament you believe are prophecy. At the moment, there appears to be no rhyme or reason for your acceptance of some prophets, and rejection of others. Do you not believe that the Church, consisting of both Jew and Gentile, was ever foreseen by God?

2ndpillar · Aug 12, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
You say that you accept the Law (Torah), and Prophets (Nevi'im). Do you also accept the Writings (Ketuvim), thereby accepting the whole of the Tanakh?

I then want to know which bits of the New Testament you believe are prophecy. At the moment, there appears to be no rhyme or reason for your acceptance of some prophets, and rejection of others. Do you not believe that the Church, consisting of both Jew and Gentile, was ever foreseen by God?

The foundational testimony of the witnessing apostles is with respect to the witness of the testimony of Yeshua, whose testimony was the "spirit of prophecy" (Revelation 19:10). The mishmash (babel) of Paul is the mishmash of Paul. The church of the Gentile church was laid out in Hosea 3, whereas Israel would be put aside for "many days" while the son of man, in the form of Hosea, took an adulterous wife (Gentiles) from another man (god/prince of the Gentiles)(Daniel 10:20), but the sons of Israel (Jacob) would eventually return to the "LORD their God and David their king". (Hosea 3:5) & (Ezekiel 37:26-28). The basic price Hosea paid for the adulterous wife was the equivalence of 30 shekels/pieces of silver (Hosea 3:2) & (Zechariah 11:12). Apparently, the adulterous wife remains under the sway of the "prince of Greece", who along with the prince of Persia fought Michael and the "certain man", whose body was like beryl. (Daniel 10). Keep in mind, the goddess of Persia is Mithra, and the Roman church was formed in the image of the Mithra religion. The pagan religion of Greece has a similar god called Apollo, with Mithra meaning the unconquerable sun, whereas Apollo and the Roman Constantine's Sol Invictus are sun gods with different names for different empires.

Redemptionsong · Aug 12, 2021

2ndpillar said:
The foundational testimony of the witnessing apostles is with respect to the witness of the testimony of Yeshua, whose testimony was the "spirit of prophecy" (Revelation 19:10). The mishmash (babel) of Paul is the mishmash of Paul. The church of the Gentile church was laid out in Hosea 3, whereas Israel would be put aside for "many days" while the son of man, in the form of Hosea, took an adulterous wife (Gentiles) from another man (god/prince of the Gentiles)(Daniel 10:20), but the sons of Israel (Jacob) would eventually return to the "LORD their God and David their king". (Hosea 3:5) & (Ezekiel 37:26-28). The basic price Hosea paid for the adulterous wife was the equivalence of 30 shekels/pieces of silver (Hosea 3:2) & (Zechariah 11:12). Apparently, the adulterous wife remains under the sway of the "prince of Greece", who along with the prince of Persia fought Michael and the "certain man", whose body was like beryl. (Daniel 10). Keep in mind, the goddess of Persia is Mithra, and the Roman church was formed in the image of the Mithra religion. The pagan religion of Greece has a similar god called Apollo, with Mithra meaning the unconquerable sun, whereas Apollo and the Roman Constantine's Sol Invictus are sun gods with different names for different empires.

If you accept the testimony of Jesus Christ, then you should accept all the words inspired by the Holy Spirit, but it appears you don't. Maybe you could be clearer as to which parts of the Bible you believe to be inspired, and which you do not.

2ndpillar · Aug 12, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
If you accept the testimony of Jesus Christ, then you should accept all the words inspired by the Holy Spirit, but it appears you don't. Maybe you could be clearer as to which parts of the Bible you believe to be inspired, and which you do not.

There are writers on this forum who think they are inspired by the "Holy Spirit", heck, you probably think you are inspired by the "Holy Spirit". There is no end to false prophets, and according to Matthew 7:13-23, the false prophets will lead the "many" to "destruction". Yeshua was clear as to what was "scripture", and what was of the "spirit of prophecy". If you are a protestant, the leaders of the protestant reformation declared the Roman church as the Harlot of Babylon, which would be a harlot daughter of Babylon, and upon this authority, you determine your canon. Development of the New Testament canon - Wikipedia Martin Luther wanted to strike Revelation, Jude, and James, and some early list did strike some of these. The 360 AD Council of Laodicea excluded Revelations. I dare say that Luther was partially correct. The only problem being his church was a daughter of the Roman church, and like mother, like daughter.

Redemptionsong · Aug 13, 2021

2ndpillar said:
There are writers on this forum who think they are inspired by the "Holy Spirit", heck, you probably think you are inspired by the "Holy Spirit". There is no end to false prophets, and according to Matthew 7:13-23, the false prophets will lead the "many" to "destruction". Yeshua was clear as to what was "scripture", and what was of the "spirit of prophecy". If you are a protestant, the leaders of the protestant reformation declared the Roman church as the Harlot of Babylon, which would be a harlot daughter of Babylon, and upon this authority, you determine your canon. Development of the New Testament canon - Wikipedia Martin Luther wanted to strike Revelation, Jude, and James, and some early list did strike some of these. The 360 AD Council of Laodicea excluded Revelations. I dare say that Luther was partially correct. The only problem being his church was a daughter of the Roman church, and like mother, like daughter.

I'm asking you a pretty straight forward question. Which books of the Bible do you consider to be inspired by God? Which books do you reject?

2ndpillar · Aug 13, 2021

Redemptionsong said:
I'm asking you a pretty straight forward question. Which books of the Bible do you consider to be inspired by God? Which books do you reject?

Although the NT represents the field in which the tare seed, the message of the devil (Mt 13), was mixed with the good seed, the message of the son of man, even the parts containing the message of the son of man have been added to and changed. If you want to discern right from wrong, evil/wickedness from righteousness (Malachi 3:15-18), then I suggest that you get the anointing which teaches you about all things. (1 John 3:27). You won't find understanding (Daniel 12:10) from those teachers appointed by the false prophet Paul. I suggest that you flee from wickedness/lawlessness. As we are at the "end of the age", and the harvesting angels are at the door, the clock seems to be ticking (Matthew 13:39). Your coming through the coming great tribulation is on your head, not mine. Find your own truth, and live or die by what you have chosen. Paul is dead, and he nor his appointees can save you or even give you an inkling of the truth. It is much like the saying, the blind lead the blind, and they both end up in the pit. If you find truth, it will be on your own dime. As for me, I am not a saving angel, I am more in the realm of the angels of the end of the age. I am more in line with gathering up the wicked and throwing them into the furnace of fire. (Matthew 13:39). We are at the time when the doors are closing (Isaiah 26:20). The pride of the arrogant and educated will not feed them (Mt 11:25), although Bill Gates and the CCP think buying American farmland will be their lottery ticket, it won't help. Without the farmer, barren land is home to weeds.

IndigoChild5559 · Aug 14, 2021

2ndpillar said:
Although the NT represents the field in which the tare seed, the message of the devil (Mt 13), was mixed with the good seed, the message of the son of man, even the parts containing the message of the son of man have been added to and changed. If you want to discern right from wrong, evil/wickedness from righteousness (Malachi 3:15-18), then I suggest that you get the anointing which teaches you about all things. (1 John 3:27). You won't find understanding (Daniel 12:10) from those teachers appointed by the false prophet Paul. I suggest that you flee from wickedness/lawlessness. As we are at the "end of the age", and the harvesting angels are at the door, the clock seems to be ticking (Matthew 13:39). Your coming through the coming great tribulation is on your head, not mine. Find your own truth, and live or die by what you have chosen. Paul is dead, and he nor his appointees can save you or even give you an inkling of the truth. It is much like the saying, the blind lead the blind, and they both end up in the pit. If you find truth, it will be on your own dime. As for me, I am not a saving angel, I am more in the realm of the angels of the end of the age. I am more in line with gathering up the wicked and throwing them into the furnace of fire. (Matthew 13:39). We are at the time when the doors are closing (Isaiah 26:20). The pride of the arrogant and educated will not feed them (Mt 11:25), although Bill Gates and the CCP think buying American farmland will be their lottery ticket, it won't help. Without the farmer, barren land is home to weeds.

It's really irritating when someone asks someone else a question, and hte someone else give a long response, none of which answers the question.

Arabia and the Bible

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Am Yisrael Chai

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.