By the way -- if you claim to be a Christian...

[Dimi95]

And now this is all a waste of time since you agreed with me. According to this article he was born Jewish, but also a Roman citizen, though some claim he became a citizen later, but at any rate it appears that he used the name Paul when dealing with Romans and Greeks:

Paul the Apostle - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I looked at my answer and i think that i misunderstood some things.

There is so little data about Paul's father and how he became Roman citizen.So Paul inherited that right according to Acts 22:28.

And i said most were in Rome , not all,you can check.

There is a path to become Roman citizen.

In ancient Rome, citizenship was the path to power

From the Republic to the Empire, civitas—full Roman citizenship—was prized by those who had it and coveted by those who did not.

www.nationalgeographic.com

What to note:

"The military provided another route for non-Romans to secure citizenship. As membership of the legion itself was reserved for citizens, a peregrinus (foreigner) could only be recruited into the auxiliary units. But on completing 25 years of service, he would be granted Roman citizenship as a reward when he graduated."

That is why i said mostly in Rome

"A child born of a legitimate union between citizen father and mother would acquire citizenship at birth."

Other source:

Loading…

www.google.com

Also another information:

"Roman citizenship could be acquire by: birth, but strictly with a Roman father and a foreign mother (children with the reverse parentage would be foreign). manumission: as freed slaves of Roman citizens would acquire also citizenship. This was a frequent form of reward for loyal slaves."

I wanted to put emphasis on something else and i misunderstood the article , i apologize.

 

[2ndpillar]

Holy Carp ... what part of "Lose the 3rd Century BC Aphocrypha" was not made clear. You are misrepresenting and misquoting the Bible

1) The other Gods up in heaven celebrating with the God Supreme are not called "Watchers" .. nor were they known as Watchers by the people during the Time Job was written .. ~1000 BC .. Sorry .. know nothing about these other Gods in attendance other than of Ha Satan -- the Adversary God Sends to test people when so desired .. the God who Tests Jesus in the Desert .. this God both a Son of the Supreme one and Chief God on Earth - This God never acts outside the will of the Supreme one .. and we are given no indication that the other Gods in attendance to either .. OK .. U Understand ?

2) We have other Son's of Gods mentioned in Genesis 6 .. but the text does not say that these Gods Rebelled against God in taking daughters of men for wives. Why are you falsely citing the Bible ?

The text just states that there were Son's of Gods who came down from the sky and took wives of the daughters of men - repeating a well known story from the universal creation story circulating at the time. Everyone believed this .. "Sky People came down -- created a hybrid human " .. the various intereactions between these "Adamu" and the Gods discussed in great detail -- "In the Religion of the Day" .. U Understand .. not the religion of 300 BC that you desperately want to insert ..

Now .. perhaps some divine beings fell from grace at a later date .. but this is not what Genesis 6 is saying.



Here we simply have Sons of God having children and making wives with daughaters of Humans .. actually getting married to them and presumably co-habitating. Precisely ZERO about these Gods (or sky people) participating in some act of rebellion on this basis.

You also have Nephilium -- who are the offspring of the coupling of these Sons of God and Humans .. the great hero's of Old - Men of Renoun. Nothign is said about these offspring of man and God turning into demons. Why have you insterted this falsehood into the text ?

Revelation has ZERO bearing on who these Gods being discussed in Job and Genesis are. One question you should be asking is who the other God's in the creation of Humans were .. who is the "US" humans are in the Image of .. as per the Religious beliefs of the Day .. What did people writing this story believe about the Gods in that story .. and those who read the story in 1000 BC ? .. the answer to which Revelations has ZERO Relevance.

Job 1:6 "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD< Satan also came among them".

This is to indicate that Satan was also a son of God. As for the demons being the spirits of the dead Nephelium, sons of the watchers, you should read Enoch and find out. You seem to feel you are superior to Enoch, well, then please tell us the source of the demons in Rev 16:13 who are from the "false prophet" and the "beast", or those being cast of the swine by Yeshua? And there is nowhere stating that the "watchers" married the daughters of men. It said they came into them, such as had intercourse with them. According to the law, if a man raped a single woman, there was a price to be paid (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). Apparently, the angel of the LORD sat down and had dinner with Abraham as well (Genesis 18:8). "The sons of God" liked what they saw and took them as wives, whomever they chose. There was no asking their fathers for permission or paying a marriage dowry. Also, the "watchers" who watch men, are angels (Rev 1:20-2:1 & 5:6), and according to Yeshua, do not marry (Mt 22:30). The 7 eyes (Rev 5:6), the watchers "are the seven spirits of God, sent out into all the earth" to "scan the whole earth" (Zechariah 4:10), as in watching the whole earth. As for your "Bible", and its canon, that was of man, particularly Athanasius, in 367 A.D. and is nothing but a mix of the "message" of the "enemy"/"devil" and the "message" of the "son of man" in the same "field" (NT book) (Mt 13:25-49). As for "Revelation" it spans from Nebuchadnezzar, the first head of the 7 headed beast, to the last head of the beast, the 7th head (Revelation 17), who was the heir of Julius Caesar (5th head), Constantine, the "beast with two horns like a lamb", the "two horns" being the Christlike leaders of Constantine's Roman church, those being Peter and Paul, for whom Constantine glorified by building them both a basilica, which is a church in the shape of a pagan cross, in line with Paul's false gospel of the cross/grace/lawlessness. We are now in the era of the 8th head of the beast, one of the 7 (Rev 17). We are also at the end of the 6th millennium, so the day of the LORD, the day of rest, the 7th millennium of rest, is just behind the door (Mt 24:29-31). Your "heroes of renown, are the gods of old, with Satan/dragon, the "ruler of the world", being the authority of the "beasts"/kings (Rev 13:4). Examples of the gods and their worship is seen in the modern-day names of the days of the week, such as Wednesday for the god Woden (Mercury), and Sunday, for the day of the sun, that being Sol Invictus.

 

[2ndpillar]

The dogma of papal infallibility is rejected by Eastern Orthodoxy.

There is a history of the Western Roman church (Pope) rejecting Eastern Orthodoxy, and everything else besides, including Protestants. They have a history of also having different canons. I was brought up in a Roman Catholic church and was taught in the 1950s that Protestants all went to hell.

Theological differences between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A rejecting B does not make A correct. They are both wrong.

 

[2ndpillar]

What a pathetically arrogant statement the above is.

Plus, it's quite obvious you have never been involved in serious Torah and/or Bible study, because if you had you would well know that intelligent scholars can read the same narrative and possibly come up with different interpretations. IMO, you're way too much into yourself.

According to Yeshua, per Matthew 11:25, your "intelligent" scholars don't know what they are talking about.

Matthew 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, “I praise Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou didst hide these things from the wise and intelligent and didst reveal them to babes.

 

[Dimi95]

I was brought up in a Roman Catholic church and was taught in the 1950s that Protestants all went to hell.

Theological differences between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A rejecting B does not make A correct. They are both wrong.

I am not interested talking about who will go to "hell".
That's topic for guys like you.
That is your ocuppation , not mine.
I have never ever said about any person of another denomination what 'they' taught you.

Matthew 7:2
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."

What i know is that the Orthodox Churches, were and still are involved in the activities pertaining to the ecumenical movement: they promote open dialogue with all the Christian Churches, as well as members of other faiths, be they Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists. The ecumenical dialogue of the Orthodox Churches communicates a profound awareness and a deep concern for the multifaceted religious experiences of man.

We in Orthodox are more focused on theosis(if you know what that means).

 

[Dimi95]

According to Yeshua, per Matthew 11:25, your "intelligent" scholars don't know what they are talking about.

Matthew 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, “I praise Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou didst hide these things from the wise and intelligent and didst reveal them to babes.

Of course that you will quote this , because this is your tactic , to attack the Son.

Matthew 7:2
"As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love."

John 10:22-30
"Then came the Festival of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was in the temple courts walking in Solomon’s Colonnade.The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.

Jesus answered, 'I did tell you, but you do not believe.' The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.I and the Father are one."

I don't use your pathetic tactic , I don't have problem to quote 'greater then all' as i don't have problem quoting 'I and the Father are one'.
It is you who go from one to another passage and mixing them up.

 

[2ndpillar]

IYO, but you ain't the final answer.

BTW, I'm much more impressed with those who actually act with love and compassion as Jesus taught versus those who are so arrogant they think they know-it-all. Maybe reread Jesus' Parable of the Sheep & Goats, and just a reminder that the "Goats" believed about Jesus but not in him.

It is the Judas goat which leads the sheep to slaughter/destruction. The goat generally refers to the leaders/shepherds, those who think they are "intelligent" and "wise", who wind up leading the sheep to destruction, and according to Ez 34, do not feed, tend, or heal the sheep, and will be dealt with with "destruction" (Ezekiel 34). The "shepherds" of Ezekiel 34 ate the fat of the fat sheep, consumed their wealth, but did not feed the hungry sheep, nor did they heal them. Sounds like a lot of preachers/shepherds I hear on TV. What Yeshua said was one was to heed his message, or they would "fall" (Mt 7:25-28). Your George Bush type of compassion was accompanied by several wars. Maybe God wants "righteousness" and "Justice" versus your woke self-complimentary compassion.

 

[Dimi95]

It is the Judas goat which leads the sheep to slaughter/destruction.
The goat generally refers to the leaders/shepherds, those who think they are "intelligent" and "wise", who wind up leading the sheep to destruction, and according to Ez 34, do not feed, tend, or heal the sheep, and will be dealt with with "destruction" (Ezekiel 34). The "shepherds" of Ezekiel 34 ate the fat of the fat sheep, consumed their wealth, but did not feed the hungry sheep, nor did they heal them. Sounds like a lot of preachers/shepherds I hear on TV. What Yeshua said was one was to heed his message, or they would "fall" (Mt 7:25-28). Your George Bush type of compassion was accompanied by several wars. Maybe God wants "righteousness" and "Justice" versus your woke self-complimentary compassion.

Maybe God wants something else , and you simply don't get it.

This reminds me of something that i saw somewhere:
"Because of 'teachers' like you he was crucified.Teachers who claimed to know the law and Scripture."

 

[2ndpillar]

Of course that you will quote this , because this is your tactic , to attack the Son.

You are going off the track. How have I attacked the "son of man" by quoting how he says understanding goes to the babes and not those who think they are intelligent. (Matthew 11:25) Those going down the broad path to destruction, while being among the "many" leads to "destruction" (Matthew 7:12), but also to lack of attachment to reality.

It is the Judas goat which leads the sheep to slaughter/destruction. The goat generally refers to the leaders/shepherds, those who think they are "intelligent" and "wise", who wind up leading the sheep to destruction, and according to Ez 34, do not feed, tend, or heal the sheep, and will be dealt with with "destruction" (Ezekiel 34). The "shepherds" of Ezekiel 34 ate the fat of the fat sheep, consumed their wealth, but did not feed the hungry sheep, nor did they heal them. Sounds like a lot of preachers/shepherds I hear on TV. What Yeshua said was one was to heed his message, or they would "fall" (Mt 7:25-28). Your George Bush type of compassion was accompanied by several wars. Maybe God wants "righteousness" and "Justice" versus your woke self-complimentary compassion.

I am not interested talking about who will go to "hell".
That's topic for guys like you.
That is your ocuppation , not mine.
I have never ever said about any person of another denomination what 'they' taught you.

Matthew 7:2
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."

What i know is that the Orthodox Churches, were and still are involved in the activities pertaining to the ecumenical movement: they promote open dialogue with all the Christian Churches, as well as members of other faiths, be they Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists. The ecumenical dialogue of the Orthodox Churches communicates a profound awareness and a deep concern for the multifaceted religious experiences of man.

We in Orthodox are more focused on theosis(if you know what that means).

The Roman Catholic church is just as wrong as the Orthodox church, which has made Constantine (the beast with two horns like a lamb), the guy who murdered his wife and son, a saint. Hell comes from the word Sheol (abode of the dead) which means the grave. No one escapes death (Jeremiah 31:30). Paul may have told you that you will not "sleep"/die, but I am saying the Word of God, says you will die, and your Orthodox church and its dogmas will not save you. The "ecumenical movement" was started around the 1960s and is an assimilation of the lawless/wicked. Being among the "many" (Matthew 7:12), is not going to help anyone. It puts you among the likes of the Bahas, who are just a socialist version of Islam, who assimilate with other religions, with truncated rites of passage, but based on the same false precepts.

 

[2ndpillar]

Maybe God wants something else , and you simply don't get it.

This reminds me of something that i saw somewhere:
"Because of 'teachers' like you he was crucified.Teachers who claimed to know the law and Scripture."

According to "Christian" dogma, Yeshua was "crucified" for your sins. Yeshua's claim regarding the "Law and the prophets" was that he came to "fulfill" them, and as of today, he isn't finished (Mt 24:29-31).

 

[YoursTrue]

The dogma of papal infallibility is rejected by Eastern Orthodoxy.

I'm not speaking of papal infallibility. Obviously there are many who are not Roman Catholic and go by other precepts, But let's discuss, if possible, peacefully more about the point Jesus was making when he said he would build his church upon "this rock." Which rock was that, one might ask. “Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church.” (Matthew 16:18, Douay Version) It is rightful to ask if Jesus meant that Peter is the rock on which His church is built? We weren't there when Jesus said this, so we might imagine Jesus was pointing to a rock or person. But how? Was Peter the first pope? There are other questions about this that perhaps we can discuss...peacefully, if possible.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Dimi95 We should note that the church of Christ is not a literal building of stone, for, as Paul told the Athenians, God “does not dwell in handmade temples”. (Acts 17:24 "The God having made the world and all things that are in it, He being Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in hand-made temples,") How do you feel about that so far as it may relate to Jesus' words?

 

[Dimi95]

You are going off the track. How have I attacked the "son of man" by quoting how he says understanding goes to the babes and not those who think they are intelligent. (Matthew 11:25)

You are so obvious
You ignore the verses before as you ignore those after.What you do is quote one verse so it can fit into your understanding.

Those going down the broad path to destruction, while being among the "many" leads to "destruction" (Matthew 7:12), but also to lack of attachment to reality.

Matthew 7:12
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

Many here have tried to reason you , but you refuse.

The Roman Catholic church is just as wrong as the Orthodox church

Which of course you can't prove without your obvious tactic.
This is your agenda , to accuse , rather then learning.

, which has made Constantine (the beast with two horns like a lamb)

There have been many attempts to explain who the beast is , but those are just people who are focused on the beast.

From where i come we say : What you sow, that you will reap.

, the guy who murdered his wife and son, a saint.

Which you know nothing about.

Hell comes from the word Sheol (abode of the dead) which means the grave. No one escapes death (Jeremiah 31:30). Paul may have told you that you will not "sleep"/die, but I am saying the Word of God, says you will die, and your Orthodox church and its dogmas will not save you.

This is evidence plus that you don't know in what we belive.You don't even understand what is Orthodox and what is Christianity!
Are Orthodox Catholics?

The "ecumenical movement" was started around the 1960s and is an assimilation of the lawless/wicked.

Which for certain is not true.
Orthodox Church has been the only defender of the poor and the week in the East , which you know NOTHING about.

Being among the "many" (Matthew 7:12), is not going to help anyone.

It will help you , if you read it and not use it for accusation.

It puts you among the likes of the Bahas, who are just a socialist version of Islam, who assimilate with other religions, with truncated rites of passage, but based on the same false precepts.

Well , i have been talking to Bahas here, and they seem like kind persons.Because we have different belief , that does not mean that we should send each other in "hell".
That is your thing..

 

[Dimi95]

According to "Christian" dogma, Yeshua was "crucified" for your sins. Yeshua's claim regarding the "Law and the prophets" was that he came to "fulfill" them, and as of today, he isn't finished (Mt 24:29-31).

Oh , so now he is here to fulfill them and he is not "The Law and the Prophets" as you previously claimed.

Tik-tok , tik-tok....

 

[Dimi95]

I'm not speaking of papal infallibility. Obviously there are many who are not Roman Catholic and go by other precepts, But let's discuss, if possible, peacefully more about the point Jesus was making when he said he would build his church upon "this rock." Which rock was that, one might ask. “Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church.” (Matthew 16:18, Douay Version) It is rightful to ask if Jesus meant that Peter is the rock on which His church is built? We weren't there when Jesus said this, so we might imagine Jesus was pointing to a rock or person. But how? Was Peter the first pope? There are other questions about this that perhaps we can discuss...peacefully, if possible.

Who spoke on the day of Pentecost?
You are giving less importance to the Pentecost and more on the Pope.

Pope is just a title the Roman Bishop claimed.

 

[Dimi95]

@Dimi95 We should note that the church of Christ is not a literal building of stone

Nor do i see it as such

, for, as Paul told the Athenians, God “does not dwell in handmade temples”.

And i agree with that.
What is your argument?

(Acts 17:24 "The God having made the world and all things that are in it, He being Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in hand-made temples,") How do you feel about that so far as it may relate to Jesus' words?

Again , i agree
What made you think that i see it otherwise?

 

[YoursTrue]

Who spoke on the day of Pentecost?
You are giving less importance to the Pentecost and more on the Pope.

Me? I'm going over the idea some have about that and showing eventually what the words refer to.

 

[YoursTrue]

Nor do i see it as such


And i agree with that.
What is your argument?


Again , i agree
What made you think that i see it otherwise?

Just going over it

 

[Dimi95]

Me? I'm going over the idea some have about that and showing eventually what the words refer to.

It was not litteraly reffered to you , i apologize if you understood it as such.

For me , that is the meaning of the 'rock'.
The day of Pentecost has a great importance in Christianity.That is where Peter stood up , the very begining.

Maybe Matthew 19 will help with - the first and the last.

 

[Dimi95]

Just going over it

When i say Church i mean community.
Just to be clear.