Did the true church ever vanish or completely fall away?

[sojourner]

Look above! What did I say.? Wrong again.

sincerly said: ↑
Is that any different than you are doing claiming "fun"? GOD doesn't lie.
That action was pulling wings off and watching them squirm."



GOD'S truth doesn't need man's buffing with wingless bugs. Nor was it in the story. Just more of your wrong addition to HIS Word.

This is such a non-reply. You've really got nothing. At least God had a snappy comeback for Job. Apparently, at this point in the game, you can't even manage that...

 

[sincerly]

This is such a non-reply. You've really got nothing. At least God had a snappy comeback for Job. Apparently, at this point in the game, you can't even manage that...

Truth doesn't need a "snappy comeback".

 

[sojourner]

Truth doesn't need a "snappy comeback".

I dunno... God seems to have plenty of them...

Or are you stating that God is untrue?

 

[sincerly]

I dunno... God seems to have plenty of them...

Or are you stating that God is untrue?

There was nothing in my posts which indicated that GOD IS/WAS UNTRUE.

 

[sojourner]

There was nothing in my posts which indicated that GOD IS/WAS UNTRUE.

Sure there was. When I said you didn't have a snappy comeback, you indicated that that meant you had the truth, stating that truth didn't need a snappy comeback. (And this in the face of knowing that God used some pretty snappy comebacks.) Therefore, if it's true that your lack of a snappy comeback is evidence that you have the truth, then, conversely, using your argument, God's use of multiple snappy comebacks is evidence that God is not true.

 

[sincerly]

sincerly said: ↑
There was nothing in my posts which indicated that GOD IS/WAS UNTRUE.

Sure there was. When I said you didn't have a snappy comeback, you indicated that that meant you had the truth, stating that truth didn't need a snappy comeback. (And this in the face of knowing that God used some pretty snappy comebacks.) Therefore, if it's true that your lack of a snappy comeback is evidence that you have the truth, then, conversely, using your argument, God's use of multiple snappy comebacks is evidence that God is not true.

Your answer is only a lie. It is fabricated in your mind. Here is a saying for you from James 5:12, , "But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation."

The True Church is still alive and well

 

[sojourner]

Your answer is only a lie.

Hey, you put forth the conditions of the argument; you said it -- not me.

It is fabricated in your mind.

Anyone here is capable of reading the argument you offered. It ain't just me.

"But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation."

This is not cogent to the argument. Spewing random bits of scripture doesn't make you "right" or "true."

The True Church is still alive and well

Of course it is.

 

[sincerly]

Hey, you put forth the conditions of the argument; you said it -- not me.

and you posted contrary/in contradiction to the Scriptures.

Anyone here is capable of reading the argument you offered. It ain't just me.

True, and you were advised to use the "ignore button".

sincerly said: ↑
"But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation."

This is not cogent to the argument. Spewing random bits of scripture doesn't make you "right" or "true."

Yes, it is! A "yes or no" is better than a lie.

sincerly said: ↑
The True Church is still alive and well

Of course it is.[/QUOTE]

Do you see how easy that was?

 

[sojourner]

and you posted contrary/in contradiction to the Scriptures.

I've posted in contradiction to your interpretation of them...

True, and you were advised to use the "ignore button".

I noticed you haven't taken that advice. This is just more double standard from you.

Yes, it is! A "yes or no" is better than a lie.

Yeah, but that's not really what the text says, is it! "Better than a lie" is not found in that bit of text. You're making it say what you want it to say, which you've always denied doing. More double standard.

Do you see how easy that was?

The hard part is getting you to realize that the church is true, and that it includes way more people than you believe it includes.

 

[sincerly]

sincerly said: ↑
and you posted contrary/in contradiction to the Scriptures.

I've posted in contradiction to your interpretation of them...

The ones you are speaking of were contextually copied..and did not agree with your "interpretation"/conclusions.

I noticed you haven't taken that advice. This is just more double standard from you.

The advice was given to you---not me! and I have no use for the feature. So the accusation is false.

sincerly said: ↑
Yes, it is! A "yes or no" is better than a lie.

Yeah, but that's not really what the text says, is it! "Better than a lie" is not found in that bit of text. You're making it say what you want it to say, which you've always denied doing. More double standard.

The text wasn't the issue. The issue was in lying as your present post is attesting.

sincerly said: ↑
The True Church is still alive and well

Of course it is.

sincerly said: ↑
Do you see how easy that was?

The hard part is getting you to realize that the church is true, and that it includes way more people than you believe it includes.

The "True Church" is alive and well and it is "true" to the Scriptures inspired by GOD.
Since GOD does the Judging/selecting/separating and calling one home, then you and I will have to wait until that event to see the actual numbers.(Every (eye)/person will gather before HIS Throne.

 

[sojourner]

The ones you are speaking of were contextually copied..and did not agree with your "interpretation"/conclusions.

Uh, no.

The advice was given to you---not me! and I have no use for the feature.

Apparently, I don't need it either.

The text wasn't the issue. The issue was in lying as your present post is attesting.

Then why quote the text? Is it so you can say, "I post scripture in support of my argument?" Even if the scripture has nothing to do with your argument?

The "True Church" is alive and well and it is "true" to the Scriptures inspired by GOD.
Since GOD does the Judging/selecting/separating and calling one home, then you and I will have to wait until that event to see the actual numbers.(Every (eye)/person will gather before HIS Throne.

And eventually, all will accept God's gracious invitation.

 

[sincerly]

sincerly said: ↑
The ones you are speaking of were contextually copied..and did not agree with your "interpretation"/conclusions.

Uh, no.

Uh, Yes. Now you are saying that you didn't post that which you posted.

sincerly said: ↑
The text wasn't the issue. The issue was in lying as your present post is attesting.

Then why quote the text? Is it so you can say, "I post scripture in support of my argument?" Even if the scripture has nothing to do with your argument?

The quoted scriptural text does support the reason for the why your post is contradictory to the Scriptural text. The Proof you deny.
1John 1:10, "If we say that we have not sinned(lied), we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

sincerly said: ↑
The "True Church" is alive and well and it is "true" to the Scriptures inspired by GOD.
Since GOD does the Judging/selecting/separating and calling one home, then you and I will have to wait until that event to see the actual numbers.(Every (eye)/person will gather before HIS Throne.)

And eventually, all will accept God's gracious invitation.

The "invitation is Gracious" and it is offered while the books of life are open and being recorded for the person.
Your "eventually all will accept" is the same lie the serpent declared to Eve."Ye shall not surely die".
Look at these verses: Rev.20:7-10; 21:8, "
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them."

Rev.21:8, "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

That group are the wicked/arrogant/defiant ones of all ages of earth's history and are in the second resurrection.(vs.20:5)

 

[sojourner]

Now you are saying that you didn't post that which you posted.

No, I'm saying that you didn't post what you said you posted. And you know that's what I said.

The quoted scriptural text does support the reason for the why your post is contradictory to the Scriptural text.

In your dreams, maybe.

The "invitation is Gracious" and it is offered while the books of life are open and being recorded for the person.
Your "eventually all will accept" is the same lie the serpent declared to Eve."Ye shall not surely die".
Look at these verses: Rev.20:7-10; 21:8, "

Look at these verses:
The kindom is like this (Lk 15):
The shepherd searches until the sheep is found. The woman searches until the coin is found. The father waits until the son comes home.
God waits and searches until all are in the kindom. Not for one week. Not until we die. Not until God gets tired of waiting. Until they are found. I'll trump your highly-metaphorical dream with parabolic teachings of Jesus any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

[sincerly]

No, I'm saying that you didn't post what you said you posted. And you know that's what I said.

In your dreams, maybe.

Look at these verses:
The kindom is like this (Lk 15):
The shepherd searches until the sheep is found. The woman searches until the coin is found. The father waits until the son comes home.
God waits and searches until all are in the kindom. Not for one week. Not until we die. Not until God gets tired of waiting. Until they are found. I'll trump your highly-metaphorical dream with parabolic teachings of Jesus any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Do you really think a parable tops reality? Dismiss Rev.20:7-10 and 21:8---that's you prerogative!

Sojourner, The GOD who knows everything about us, also, knows where we are in life relationship to HIM.
Luke 13:25-27, "When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity."

Claiming to be a part of the "kindom" will not be a key to open the door; and HE knows who are "workers of iniquity".

 

[sojourner]

Do you really think a parable tops reality?

I think a teaching of Jesus tops a dream by John of Patmos, yes.

The GOD who knows everything about us, also, knows where we are in life relationship to HIM.

I'm extremely comfortable with that.

Luke 13:25-27, "When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity."

Phil. 2: "At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord..."

Owned.

Claiming to be a part of the "kindom" will not be a key to open the door; and HE knows who are "workers of iniquity".

The door's already been opened and the invitation extended.

 

[sincerly]

sincerly said: ↑
Do you really think a parable tops reality?

I think a teaching of Jesus tops a dream by John of Patmos, yes.

I'm extremely comfortable with that.

Phil. 2: "At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord..."

Owned.

The door's already been opened and the invitation extended.

That Revelation was from JESUS to JOHN and concerning the Judgment scene at the end of time, and Yes, all will be on bended knee.
Paul was quoting from Isa.45:23, but let's look at some of the context.
45:6-7, "That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things....
Vs.9, "Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?...
vss.21-23, and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear."

In Luke19:14-27 Jesus tells this parable in which HIS "citizens hated HIM and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.". Notice the fate. ,"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."

sojourner, that is the message of Revelations which you reject.

Yes, invitations are sent and rejected---even correct attire is provided and it is rejected. However, when time comes for the "event" there will be NO delays The rejections will be noted and just action taken for "UNBELIEF".

 

[sojourner]

sincerly said: ↑
Do you really think a parable tops reality?



That Revelation was from JESUS to JOHN and concerning the Judgment scene at the end of time, and Yes, all will be on bended knee.
Paul was quoting from Isa.45:23, but let's look at some of the context.
45:6-7, "That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things....
Vs.9, "Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?...
vss.21-23, and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear."

In Luke19:14-27 Jesus tells this parable in which HIS "citizens hated HIM and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.". Notice the fate. ,"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."

sojourner, that is the message of Revelations which you reject.

Yes, invitations are sent and rejected---even correct attire is provided and it is rejected. However, when time comes for the "event" there will be NO delays The rejections will be noted and just action taken for "UNBELIEF".

Well! We're quite the little Preacher, aren't we? How Special!

Part of "context" is also looking at the time of writing, the cultural context, the religious context, the historic context, the literary context. For example, I find it interesting that, while Paul quotes Isaiah here, he doesn't complete the thought. he leaves out (intentionally) the part after "every knee shall bow," and then points to Jesus. Therefore, we can conclude that the reason Paul includes part of the passage is a very different reason from Isaiah's reason for writing his passage.

First of all, Isaiah (as well as most of the rest of the Hebrew texts) was written from a post-exilic POV. Paul isn't writing from that POV. Paul is writing from a completely different POV, where his area of the world is held by the Romans. His world view will determine his meaning, just as Isaiah's determined his meaning.

Second, you can't simply cobble together passages from apocalyptic literature, a gospel, and some prophets and expect to get anything approaching a "clear message," unless you're doing quite a bit of eisegesis. Luke is different literature from the Revelation, written to a different community, with a different impetus and with different end results in mind.

Third, I find it very interesting that you would pull out a passage that talks about "woe to him that strives with his maker," and yet I can turn around and cite a completely contradictory passage from Genesis, where Jacob is blessed at Peniel for doing the same thing!

You seem to feel that the Revelation feeds us some kind of factual information with regard to cosmology. Yet, all the indicators point to the fact that the Revelation is highly metaphorical, and most of the time rails against the Roman Empire with highly symbolic language. So, yeah, I'm fairly dismissive of the Revalation where factual history is concerned.

 

[sincerly]

Part of "context" is also looking at the time of writing, the cultural context, the religious context, the historic context, the literary context. For example, I find it interesting that, while Paul quotes Isaiah here, he doesn't complete the thought. he leaves out (intentionally) the part after "every knee shall bow," and then points to Jesus. Therefore, we can conclude that the reason Paul includes part of the passage is a very different reason from Isaiah's reason for writing his passage.

The principles remain the same.
sojourner, what part is apropos to Paul's usage is as Jesus did in reading the first portion of Isa.61:1-2, HIS beginning to Preach/teach the people.----"acceptable year of the lord".Luke 4:18-19
There is no changing of the messages from one thing to something different---as you are advacating,

First of all, Isaiah (as well as most of the rest of the Hebrew texts) was written from a post-exilic POV. Paul isn't writing from that POV. Paul is writing from a completely different POV, where his area of the world is held by the Romans. His world view will determine his meaning, just as Isaiah's determined his meaning.

Very few of the Prophets wrote after the Babylonian captivity. Isaiah was written approx. 200 years prior to the captivity. Idolatry was a major problem and reason for the captivity..
Paul was writing from the post crucifixion/Teachings of Jesus era.----Still the same Love GOD/Neighbor philosophy.
The POV of LOVE remains the same.

Second, you can't simply cobble together passages from apocalyptic literature, a gospel, and some prophets and expect to get anything approaching a "clear message," unless you're doing quite a bit of eisegesis. Luke is different literature from the Revelation, written to a different community, with a different impetus and with different end results in mind.

sojourner, GOD and the Holy Spirit didn't "cobble together an eisegesis". What was presented to mankind was information and instructions for a right relationship to GOD and fellow Beings. Revelations like Daniel was given to HIS People and Angels even gave some identifying material contained within them.
The "impetus" is with the saving of mankind from self-destructive attitudes.

Third, I find it very interesting that you would pull out a passage that talks about "woe to him that strives with his maker," and yet I can turn around and cite a completely contradictory passage from Genesis, where Jacob is blessed at Peniel for doing the same thing!

Sojourner, the "striving" Jacob was doing with his "maker" was to obtain that blessing---NOT in contradiction to GOD'S instructions.

You seem to feel that the Revelation feeds us some kind of factual information with regard to cosmology. Yet, all the indicators point to the fact that the Revelation is highly metaphorical, and most of the time rails against the Roman Empire with highly symbolic language. So, yeah, I'm fairly dismissive of the Revalation where factual history is concerned.

No, Revelation while having some of the elements of parables or allegories does give factual information as to the happenings of the human family from the first century to the last century of earth's history.
The only "cosmology" that will be seen is in the "coming of Jesus again" and the fiery destruction of this earth and the making of the new one.

sojourner, GOD isn't a respecter of persons.

 

[sojourner]

The principles remain the same.
sojourner, what part is apropos to Paul's usage is as Jesus did in reading the first portion of Isa.61:1-2, HIS beginning to Preach/teach the people.----"acceptable year of the lord".Luke 4:18-19
There is no changing of the messages from one thing to something different---as you are advacating,

Yes, and Jesus left out all the stuff that wasn't apropos to his message, just as Paul left out all the garbage about God smiting enemies. Paul was pointing to the universality of Jesus.

Very few of the Prophets wrote after the Babylonian captivity. Isaiah was written approx. 200 years prior to the captivity.

I don't know where you're getting your information from, but Isaiah was partially written during the exile, and partially after the exile. There is ample evidence to show this, and the dates are not in dispute.

Paul was writing from the post crucifixion/Teachings of Jesus era.

Yet, Paul writes prior to the written accounts of Jesus' teachings. 1 Thess. was written 48-50 C.E. Mark (the earliest gospel) wasn't written until about 70 C.E.

GOD and the Holy Spirit didn't "cobble together an eisegesis".

No, but you have.

What was presented to mankind was information and instructions for a right relationship to GOD and fellow Beings.

What was written by human beings was a collection of the (largely) oral tradition of the Hebrews.

The "impetus" is with the saving of mankind from self-destructive attitudes.

The impetus is to preserve the oral tradition.

the "striving" Jacob was doing with his "maker" was to obtain that blessing---NOT in contradiction to GOD'S instructions.

Where in the story does it tell us that? This is a fine example of how you read stuff into the text that Is. Not. There. It says that Jacob won't let "the man" go until he gets a blessing, but it doesn't say that's why the battle happened in the first place. In fact, we're not told why the battle took place.

Revelation while having some of the elements of parables

No it doesn't.

Revelation ... does give factual information as to the happenings of the human family from the first century to the last century of earth's history

Bunk.

The only "cosmology" that will be seen is in the "coming of Jesus again" and the fiery destruction of this earth and the making of the new one.

You have no idea what "cosmology" means, do you.

GOD isn't a respecter of persons.

God is a lover of persons, and respect is part and parcel of love.

 

[sincerly]

sincerly said: ↑
The principles remain the same.
sojourner, what part is apropos to Paul's usage is as Jesus did in reading the first portion of Isa.61:1-2, HIS beginning to Preach/teach the people.----"acceptable year of the lord".Luke 4:18-19
There is no changing of the messages from one thing to something different---as you are advocating,
Click to expand...

Yes, and Jesus left out all the stuff that wasn't apropos to his message, just as Paul left out all the garbage about God smiting enemies. Paul was pointing to the universality of Jesus.

I don't know where you're getting your information from, but Isaiah was partially written during the exile, and partially after the exile. There is ample evidence to show this, and the dates are not in dispute.

The writings of the Prophets sent by GOD to the various kings do not agree with your suppositions.
The information given by GOD isn't "garbage".

Yet, Paul writes prior to the written accounts of Jesus' teachings. 1 Thess. was written 48-50 C.E. Mark (the earliest gospel) wasn't written until about 70 C.E.

It's possible that some of Paul's epistles were written before the Gospels were!

sincerly said: ↑
What was presented to mankind was information and instructions for a right relationship to GOD and fellow Beings.

What was written by human beings was a collection of the (largely) oral tradition of the Hebrews.

GOD gave those laws, statutes, judgments, ordinances, Commandments to the people by the writing of Moses. The traditions of/made by men were men's thinking.

The impetus is to preserve the oral tradition

.

GOD'S impetus, since the "fall of mankind", has been on the .restoration of all things lost in disobedience.

sincerly said: ↑
the "striving" Jacob was doing with his "maker" was to obtain that blessing---NOT in contradiction to GOD'S instructions.

Where in the story does it tell us that? This is a fine example of how you read stuff into the text that Is. Not. There. It says that Jacob won't let "the man" go until he gets a blessing, but it doesn't say that's why the battle happened in the first place. In fact, we're not told why the battle took place.

Jacob's first visit to Bethel Gen,28:15-21 produced this response and vow. "And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of....
And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,"
So that I come again to my father's house in peace; then shall the LORD be my God":
The second visit brought Gen.32:26,30, "And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me....28...And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed...30...And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." IT wasn't a "man".

sincerly said: ↑
Revelation ... does give factual information as to the happenings of the human family from the first century to the last century of earth's history

Bunk

The nonsense is not from Revelations, but from your thinking.

.
sojourner said: ↑
You seem to feel that the Revelation feeds us some kind of factual information with regard to cosmology.

The only "cosmology" that will be seen is in the "coming of Jesus again" and the fiery destruction of this earth and the making of the new one.

You have no idea what "cosmology" means, do you.

Mankind is earthly and not of the universe.


God is a lover of persons, and respect is part and parcel of love.

Yes, and Jesus left out all the stuff that wasn't apropos to his message, just as Paul left out all the garbage about God smiting enemies. Paul was pointing to the universality of Jesus.[/quote]

Let's look at Isa.61:1-3 and the message Jesus said was being fulfilled."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;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;
To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified."

And Luke 4:18-21, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised",
To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears."

Luke 7:22-23, "Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.
And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me."

That which Jesus spoke was fulfilled in their ears that day. However. ""and the day of vengeance of our God;"" will not occur until the day of judgment takes place(still future). Or as the demons acknowledged. Matt.8:29,"And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?"


I don't know where you're getting your information from, but Isaiah was partially written during the exile, and partially after the exile. There is ample evidence to show this, and the dates are not in dispute.

Yet, Paul writes prior to the written accounts of Jesus' teachings. 1 Thess. was written 48-50 C.E. Mark (the earliest gospel) wasn't written until about 70 C.E.

No, but you have.

What was written by human beings was a collection of the (largely) oral tradition of the Hebrews.

The impetus is to preserve the oral tradition.

Where in the story does it tell us that? This is a fine example of how you read stuff into the text that Is. Not. There. It says that Jacob won't let "the man" go until he gets a blessing, but it doesn't say that's why the battle happened in the first place. In fact, we're not told why the battle took place.

No it doesn't.

Bunk.

You have no idea what "cosmology" means, do you.

God is a lover of persons, and respect is part and parcel of love.[/QUOTE]