JESUS, God, the Ordinal First and Last

[joelr]

I'm in agreement with most of your post - The wedding of Canaan comes to mind where Jusus provided the wine - Canaanites? Baal? Lots has been written about Baal, but wasn't Baal said to be an enemy to the Abrahamic God? Christianity also seems to be an opposition to the Abrahamic God or religion. Sacrifice - apparently was the issue between the Canaanites and Israel. Was it just happenstance that Jesus played the role of a human sacrifice?

Baal protects the king - This seems to be a common thought, but if Baal was the God of the Canaanites and the Canaanites were accused of human sacrificial practices, then did Baal truly protect the King - I'm seeing Moses and Jesus relevant - Sent away to avoid their sacrifice as sons. What of the woman - Melchizedek - A high priest - A woman or a man? Was it only male sacrifice or woman sacrifice also?

Chess

Stand by your counter-part -

The furnace - the stubble burned as waste to bring out the greater qualities of being - purification - to be complete and whole and acceptable. The coming age -

Only know this about Baal and the Hebrews
"
Narrative in the Hebrew Bible tells a similar story. For example, in 1 Kings 16:33, King Ahab makes a shrine for Asherah. 2 Kings 17:16 even references people who worship Asherah and Baal. Likewise, Baal worship occurs consistently throughout the narrative, suggesting that he "played a large part in the belief of the Israelite population" during the Iron Age (DDD 1999, 137)."



Ashera was an early consort of Yahweh

"
An inscription from another archaeological site (Khirbet el-Qom, 8th century BCE) says the following: "Blessed is Uriahu by YHWH for through Asherata He saved him from his enemy." Here, we see strong evidence that Asherata, a deity, represented a person named Uriahu before Yahweh. In Ugaritic literature, we see a similar understanding of the deities. The Ugaritic goddess Athirat was a mediator for El, the chief god of the Ugaritic pantheon. The parallel in how people understood deities (Yahweh is to Asherata as El is to Athirat) demonstrates how ancient Israel and Judah shared a cultural and religious framework with the broader West Semitic culture; yet, they were also unique in the sense that they worshiped a particular deity who uniquely represented their tribal system(s). "


Dying/rising saviors were more from the Greek Hellenistic era which the NT has many many other connections to, baptism, eucharist, the logos, written in Greek, souls that through redemption and salvation can go to heaven, all absent in Judaism but popular before Christianity. The Hellenistic Greeks occupied Israel for the final century before 1 CE:

"Within the confines of what was then the Roman Empire, long before and during the dawn of Christianity, there were many dying-and-rising gods. And yes, they were gods—some even half-god, half-human, being of divine or magical parentage, just like Jesus (John 1:1-18; Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-35; Philippians 2:6-8 & Romans 8:3). And yes, they died. And were dead. And yes, they were then raised back to life; and lived on, even more powerful than before. Some returned in the same body they died in; some lived their second life in even more powerful and magical bodies than they died in, like Jesus did (1 Corinthians 15:35-50 & 2 Corinthians 5:1-10). Some left empty tombs or gravesites; or had corpses that were lost or vanished. Just like Jesus. Some returned to life on “the third day” after dying. Just like Jesus. All went on to live and reign in heaven (not on earth). Just like Jesus. Some even visited earth after being raised, to deliver a message to disciples or followers, before ascending into the heavens. Just like Jesus."

Dying-and-Rising Gods: It's Pagan, Guys. Get Over It. • Richard Carrier

 

[101G]

Are you kidding me??? Here is the proof? Scripture??????? So is Zeus real because it says he is in Greek scripture? Krishna must be real because he did quite a lot as well?
"It's true because it says so", that is the worst proof in the history of proof?
Hosea was written AFTER the 2nd Temple Period when the Israelites switched to only Yahweh worship and got rid of Ashera and other deities.

say so? ..... Oh NO, KNOW SO.

Yahweh is also Canaanite in origin.
Yahweh

yes, man made.

Yahweh is pagan, Jesus is Pagan as is the theology of the entire religion.

101G agree that "Yahweh" is pagan, but not Yeshua/Jesus, we have the name, and without Canaanite origin.
the Strong's # is (H3442), look this Strong’s number up. it is written Yod-Shin-Vav-Ayin, it is a masculine noun that means, "He is salvation" or "He saves”. for only God SAVES. H3442 יֵשׁוַּע Yeshuwa` (yay-shoo'-ah) n/l.
1. he will save.

but I will not go as far as the whole entire religion is pagan. that's a personal opinion, which do not move me at all.

nor the rest of your post.

101G.

 

[Balthazzar]

First ERROR of the Day, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" the term "being" is present tense, and "form" is NATURE. it is the Greek word,
G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313

you're corrected there.

Second ERROR of the Day. Elohim here is expressed as magistrates of the land, or Judges.
G2316 θεός theos (the-os') n.
1. (properly, in Greek) a god or deity. a supernatural, powerful entity (real or imagined).
2. (by Hebraism, especially with G3588) God, the Supreme Being, the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Yahweh by name.
3. (figuratively) a supreme magistrate (in the land).
[of uncertain affinity]
KJV: X exceeding, God, god(-ly, -ward)

you're reproved there also.

101G

The difference is what exactly? Knowing fruits and discernment is a quality granted by knowing God - To be conscious and aware, knowing both good and evil, truth and error - The quality of being as them, the gods. The championed magistrate position of being capable of discernment, to know the difference between truth and error. An expectation as children of God by God and for God - Equal is not robbery, yet equal requires a secure root system for the grounding, hence the choice to be a servant as a man as opposed to choosing the opposite as a man and to rule as a king. It's in the collective body that we find God's grace as children and co heirs of Gods "kingdom".

 

[101G]

Only know this about Baal and the Hebrews
"
Narrative in the Hebrew Bible tells a similar story. For example, in 1 Kings 16:33, King Ahab makes a shrine for Asherah. 2 Kings 17:16 even references people who worship Asherah and Baal. Likewise, Baal worship occurs consistently throughout the narrative, suggesting that he "played a large part in the belief of the Israelite population" during the Iron Age (DDD 1999, 137)."



Ashera was an early consort of Yahweh

"
An inscription from another archaeological site (Khirbet el-Qom, 8th century BCE) says the following: "Blessed is Uriahu by YHWH for through Asherata He saved him from his enemy." Here, we see strong evidence that Asherata, a deity, represented a person named Uriahu before Yahweh. In Ugaritic literature, we see a similar understanding of the deities. The Ugaritic goddess Athirat was a mediator for El, the chief god of the Ugaritic pantheon. The parallel in how people understood deities (Yahweh is to Asherata as El is to Athirat) demonstrates how ancient Israel and Judah shared a cultural and religious framework with the broader West Semitic culture; yet, they were also unique in the sense that they worshiped a particular deity who uniquely represented their tribal system(s). "


Dying/rising saviors were more from the Greek Hellenistic era which the NT has many many other connections to, baptism, eucharist, the logos, written in Greek, souls that through redemption and salvation can go to heaven, all absent in Judaism but popular before Christianity. The Hellenistic Greeks occupied Israel for the final century before 1 CE:

"Within the confines of what was then the Roman Empire, long before and during the dawn of Christianity, there were many dying-and-rising gods. And yes, they were gods—some even half-god, half-human, being of divine or magical parentage, just like Jesus (John 1:1-18; Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-35; Philippians 2:6-8 & Romans 8:3). And yes, they died. And were dead. And yes, they were then raised back to life; and lived on, even more powerful than before. Some returned in the same body they died in; some lived their second life in even more powerful and magical bodies than they died in, like Jesus did (1 Corinthians 15:35-50 & 2 Corinthians 5:1-10). Some left empty tombs or gravesites; or had corpses that were lost or vanished. Just like Jesus. Some returned to life on “the third day” after dying. Just like Jesus. All went on to live and reign in heaven (not on earth). Just like Jesus. Some even visited earth after being raised, to deliver a message to disciples or followers, before ascending into the heavens. Just like Jesus."

Dying-and-Rising Gods: It's Pagan, Guys. Get Over It. • Richard Carrier

you fellas can jump off into mythology all you want. but none of it changes any FACTS in the Bible that God is a plurality ... of himself, one person and one person only.

101G.

 

[101G]

The difference is what exactly? Knowing fruits and discernment is a quality granted by knowing God - To be conscious and aware, knowing both good and evil, truth and error - The quality of being as them, the gods. The championed magistrate position of being capable of discernment, to know the difference between truth and error. An expectation as children of God by God and for God - Equal is not robbery, yet equal requires a secure root system for the grounding, hence the choice to be a servant as a man as opposed to choosing the opposite as a man and to rule as a king. It's in the collective body that we find God's grace as children and co heirs of Gods "kingdom".

man do not have the wisdom of God. just ask Solomon. and especially not today.

101G.

 

[joelr]

you fellas can jump off into mythology all you want. but none of it changes any FACTS in the Bible that God is a plurality ... of himself, one person and one person only.

101G.

Yes they took that from the Persians as well:

"
God

t Zoroaster went much further, and in a startling departure from accepted beliefs proclaimed Ahura Mazda to be the one uncreated God, existing eternally, and Creator of all else that is good, including all other beneficent divinities. "


But everything said about Yahweh was also being said about Inana 1000 years before.
It isn't any more of a "fact" in the OT as it is in Persian scripture.
This is all still "it's true because it says so".
Your response to the last post about that is to do it again?

3:15 Yahweh is the same as older Greek gods. Anthropormorphic, dynamic, colorful, emotional, vivid, changeable, masculine, real body parts. In "God: An Anatomy" Francesca explains the Hebrew text is very explicit in this.


Francesca Stavrakopoulou

The OT is all Mesopotamian mythology reworked for a new myth. The NT is Persian and Greek theology.

Judaism - Myths


Myths

Biblical myths are found mainly in the first 11 chapters of Genesis, the first book of the Bible. They are concerned with the creation of the world and the first man and woman, the origin of the current human condition, the primeval Deluge, the distribution of peoples, and the variation of languages.

The basic stories are derived from the popular lore of the ancient Middle East; parallels can be found in the extant literature of the peoples of the area. The Mesopotamians, for instance, also knew of an earthly paradise such as Eden, and the figure of the cherubim—properly griffins rather than angels—was known to the Canaanites. In the Bible, however, this mythical garden of the gods becomes the scene of man’s fall and the background of a story designed to account for the natural limitations of human life. Similarly, the Babylonians told of the formation of humankind from clay. But, whereas in the pagan tale the first man’s function is to serve as an earthly menial of the gods, in the scriptural version his role is to rule over all other creatures. The story of the Deluge, including the elements of the ark and the dispatch of the raven and dove, appears already in the Babylonian myths of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis. There, however, the hero is eventually made immortal, whereas in the Bible this detail is omitted because, to the Israelite mind, no child of woman could achieve that status. Lastly, while the story of the Tower of Babel was told originally to account for the stepped temples (ziggurats) of Babylonia, to the Hebrew writer its purpose is simply to inculcate the moral lesson that humans should not aspire beyond their assigned station.


Scattered through the Prophets and Holy Writings (the two latter portions of the Hebrew Bible) are allusions to other ancient myths—e.g., to that of a primordial combat between YHWH and a monster variously named Leviathan (Wriggly), Rahab (Braggart), or simply Sir Sea or Dragon. The Babylonians told likewise of a fight between their god Marduk and the monster Tiamat; the Hittites told of a battle between the weather god and the dragon Illuyankas; while a Canaanite poem from Ras Shamra (ancient Ugarit) in northern Syria relates the discomfiture of Sir Sea by the deity Baal and the rout of an opponent named Leviathan. Originally, this myth probably referred to the annual subjugation of the floods.

Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text


The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis. Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.



Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer, translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.




Both Genesis and Enuma Elsih are religious texts which detail and celebrate cultural origins: Genesis describes the origin and founding of the Jewish people under the guidance of the Lord; Enuma Elish recounts the origin and founding of Babylon under the leadership of the god Marduk. Contained in each work is a story of how the cosmos and man were created. Each work begins by describing the watery chaos and primeval darkness that once filled the universe. Then light is created to replace the darkness. Afterward, the heavens are made and in them heavenly bodies are placed. Finally, man is created.

 

[101G]

Now back to God's Plurality. Genesis 1:1 holds the key.

101G.

 

[101G]

Yes they took that from the Persians as well:

"
God

t Zoroaster went much further, and in a startling departure from accepted beliefs proclaimed Ahura Mazda to be the one uncreated God, existing eternally, and Creator of all else that is good, including all other beneficent divinities. "


But everything said about Yahweh was also being said about Inana 1000 years before.

3:15 Yahweh is the same as older Greek gods. Anthropormorphic, dynamic, colorful, emotional, vivid, changeable, masculine, real body parts. In "God: An Anatomy" Francesca explains the Hebrew text is very explicit in this.


Francesca Stavrakopoulou

yes, there is a lot of corruption, I agree, but through the corruption there is TRUTH. let's walk to the LIGHT/TRUTH. and get it right..... agreed?

101G.

 

[joelr]

yes, there is a lot of corruption, I agree, but through the corruption there is TRUTH. let's walk to the LIGHT/TRUTH. and get it right..... agreed?

101G.

Sure. The Hebrew theologians borrowed Mesopotamian myths and then Persian myths. The NT is Greek/Persian. They are all made up stories about deities.

People claimed revelations when those are fiction. That is a bit corrupt. Some good wisdom for life anyways. Gods, definitely fiction. Evidence will reveal the truth. I agree.





Relationship to the Bible[edit]

Various themes, plot elements, and characters in the Hebrew Bible correlate with the Epic of Gilgamesh – notably, the accounts of the Garden of Eden, the advice from Ecclesiastes, and the Genesis flood narrative.

Garden of Eden[edit]

The parallels between the stories of Enkidu/Shamhat and Adam/Eve have been long recognized by scholars.[64][65] In both, a man is created from the soil by a god, and lives in a natural setting amongst the animals. He is introduced to a woman who tempts him. In both stories the man accepts food from the woman, covers his nakedness, and must leave his former realm, unable to return. The presence of a snake that steals a plant of immortality from the hero later in the epic is another point of similarity. However, a major difference between the two stories is that while Enkidu experiences regret regarding his seduction away from nature, this is only temporary: After being confronted by the god Shamash for being ungrateful, Enkidu recants and decides to give the woman who seduced him his final blessing before he dies. This is in contrast to Adam, whose fall from grace is largely portrayed purely as a punishment for disobeying God.

Advice from Ecclesiastes[edit]

Several scholars suggest direct borrowing of Siduri's advice by the author of Ecclesiastes.[66]

A rare proverb about the strength of a triple-stranded rope, "a triple-stranded rope is not easily broken", is common to both books.[citation needed]

Noah's flood[edit]

Andrew George submits that the Genesis flood narrative matches that in Gilgamesh so closely that "few doubt" that it derives from a Mesopotamian account.[67] What is particularly noticeable is the way the Genesis flood story follows the Gilgamesh flood tale "point by point and in the same order", even when the story permits other alternatives.[68] In a 2001 Torah commentary released on behalf of the Conservative Movement of Judaism, rabbinic scholar Robert Wexler stated: "The most likely assumption we can make is that both Genesis and Gilgamesh drew their material from a common tradition about the flood that existed in Mesopotamia. These stories then diverged in the retelling."[69] Ziusudra, Utnapishtim and Noah are the respective heroes of the Sumerian, Akkadian and biblical flood legends of the ancient Near East.

Additional biblical parallels[edit]

Matthias Henze suggests that Nebuchadnezzar's madness in the biblical Book of Daniel draws on the Epic of Gilgamesh. He claims that the author uses elements from the description of Enkidu to paint a sarcastic and mocking portrait of the king of Babylon.[70]

Many characters in the Epic have mythical biblical parallels, most notably Ninti, the Sumerian goddess of life, was created from Enki's rib to heal him after he had eaten forbidden flowers. It is suggested that this story served as the basis for the story of Eve created from Adam's rib in the Book of Genesis.[71] Esther J. Hamori, in Echoes of Gilgamesh in the Jacob Story, also claims that the myth of Jacob and Esau is paralleled with the wrestling match between Gilgamesh and Enkidu.[72]

 

[Balthazzar]

man do not have the wisdom of God. just ask Solomon. and especially not today.

101G.

The nucleus of being - a whole unit - The wedding and union - Father son spirit - The wisdom of God is in the collective body of. As individuals - the personal relationship must be in truth and sincerity to be truly acceptable - The honoring of God in spirit and truth - An honest and good heart - Crying at the gates to each of us for the hearing and understanding - She (Sophia) the spirit of truth? The Holy spirit of God.

Proverbial paraphrasing intended

 

[Fool]

GINOLJC, to all.
so we can take it as you have no scripture to rebuke what was posted? thought so.

101G.

no you don't because you don't know the name. where two or more gather in my name I AM there. the name isn't jesus. the name is reference all through out the bible and yet it isn't jesus.

John 5:43

revlation 3:12

the name is the seal of the living god

john 14:1


moses asked for his name

exodus 3:14

that name cannot be tied to any form because all forms were formed by it.

genesis 12:8

the name is implied in reference to the Lord. Lord is not the name

 

[101G]

Sure. The Hebrew theologians borrowed Mesopotamian myths and then Persian myths. The NT is Greek/Persian. They are all made up stories about deities.

People claimed revelations when those are fiction. That is a bit corrupt. Some good wisdom for life anyways. Gods, definitely fiction. Evidence will reveal the truth. I agree.

thanks for the reply. but if what you say is true, why are these things the bible say comes TRUE? if just made up.

101G

 

[101G]

The nucleus of being - a whole unit - The wedding and union - Father son spirit - The wisdom of God is in the collective body of. As individuals - the personal relationship must be in truth and sincerity to be truly acceptable - The honoring of God in spirit and truth - An honest and good heart - Crying at the gates to each of us for the hearing and understanding - She (Sophia) the spirit of truth? The Holy spirit of God.

Proverbial paraphrasing intended

no problem, and is not the Lord Jesus, the Father & son in Amalgamation, even now as we speak? only the union of the bride and groom in the consummate Holy matrimony at his return? Joined as one. until now are we not in the espousal state in Spirit? being taught of God, the Holy Spirit, Spiritual things? ...... Amen

101G.

 

[101G]

moses asked for his name

Oh my. what did Moses ask God? "What is your name" and God Gave him exactly what he asked, no more or less.

do you understand the difference between "WHAT" is a person name vs "Who" is a person name? do you!. let's see. if 101G ask you "WHAT" is the first woman's name. if you said "Eve" you would be in ERROR. because that's not "WHAT" her name is ... no "WHAT" her name is .... Adam... Oh yes, because that's "WHAT" her name is. supportive scripture, Genesis 5:1 "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;" Genesis 5:2 "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created."

understand, "WHAT" she is in mane is a Adam, because the name Adam describes ... "WHAT: she is.

now, if 101G would have asked you, "WHO" was the First woman name, the correct answer would be "EVE" because that's who she is in name, and not "WHAT" she is in name. SEE THE DIFFERENCE NOW?

go back and read what Moses ask God ...... "WHAT" is your name. and God gave him just what he asked for. "I AM", that's "WHAT" he, God is..... I AM KING, I AM LORD, I AM Saviour, IAM Redeemer.... ect.... these are "WHAT" GOD is in Name.

now if Moses would have asked God, "Who are you in Name", God would have answer, "YESHUA/JESUS"

know and understand the difference in "WHAT" vs "WHO" in a NAME.

101G.

 

[101G]

God as Ordinal First, and Ordinal Last. the Greeks have a word that describe this designation of God as First and Last and it is the Greek word G243 Allos, it "expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort;"

this "numerical difference" Express the Hebrew ECHAD to a tee. this another is not a separate person, no, but the EQUAL SHARE of himself in his own CREATION. this is the beauty of diversified oneness. Father who creates and makes all things, and Son who redeems and saves what he created and made

the titles, "Father", and "Son", are just another way of saying "First" and "Last"

Jesus as "CREATOR" and "MAKER" is Spirit. eternal, outside his creation. having the title Father, RANK, LORD. ORDER, Ordinal First, PLACE, OT, TIME, in the Beginning. as CREATOR, he is Maker of all things, just as Isaiah 44:24 and John 1:3 and many other places, as stated in the bible. and as CREATOR he is the FIRSTFRUIT of Creation.

Jesus as "REDEEMER" and "SAVIOUR", is flesh bone and blood, inside his creation, limited, by and in his creation. having the title Son, RANK Lord, ORDER, Ordinal Last, PLACE, NT, TIME, in the END, of all things that swill be made all new. just as Isaiah 66:22, and Revelation 21:5 and many other places, as stated in the bible. as SAVIOUR, he is the END TIME Harvest, the FIRST FRUIT from the DEAD.

the Holy Spirit is HIM, (JESUS), the First and the Last, the same one PERSON. Holy is his character, which the term Son means, (G5207, huios). and Spirit is his NATURE, which is (G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee')), which is the ECHAD in NATURE, not different or separate Nature but a G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros), which is a "SHARED" nature..... EQUALLY.

so, there is only one person in the Godhead supportive scripture.
1 Corinthians 12:4 "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit." 1 Corinthians 12:5 "And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord."1 Corinthians 12:6 "And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all."

TRIUTH right before our eyes.

101G.

Key terms to understand.

ANOTHER as "ONE" in the SAME PERSON, Equally Shared

Another: G243 ἄλλος allos (al'-los) adj.
Another: H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd'

 

[Ella S.]

oh man I'd be careful with that...they are all writing eyewitness accounts of their time with Christ during his ministry. To say they have different beliefs is to say they were not all trained in the gospel by the incarnate Jesus.

The point of the differences in the Gospels is not the differing beliefs of the apostles...it is the different beliefs of their audience!

They were preaching/teaching different cultures. Those preaching to Jews had a slightly different message to those preaching to Gentiles.

This is the common, folkloric interpretation of the gospels given by Christianity. It's not historically accurate, though. The gospels were definitely not written by contemporaries of Jesus, having been penned down decades after his death.

It's also quite clear that John is a forgery and that Luke and Matthew both plagiarized Mark. So the only gospel that could potentially be an "eyewitness" is Mark. Except, again, Mark was written long after the life of Jesus and it is clearly meant to be a parable, not a literal account. It uses heavy symbolism and a mythical narrative framing.

You're not going to tell me that you think "Barabbas" was an actual name, right? It's obviously taken from "bar abba" or "Son of the Father." It's not an actual person and nobody had that name. That's one of many examples of why Mark was clearly meant as a fictional allegory.

This does not mean error in the writings, it means errors on your comprehension and interpretations skills when reading scripture.

Instead of explaining away apparent contradictions as biblical error, perhaps try to interpreted in a manner that stays consistent with ALL scripture as being inspired by God.

Trying to interpret every piece of scripture in the Bible as internally consistent is precisely what leads to an error in comprehension, though. It's a complete misunderstanding of where these texts came from.

They were all written by different authors for different purposes. Most of them aren't even the original texts, but later versions of them that have been heavily altered over generations of transmissions.

You're not going to be able to understand what the author of Matthew actually meant if you're trying to interpret Matthew according to John.

Inspiration of scripture means that God guided all writings and He did so for a reason...so it (the Bible) doesn't have any doctrinal errors.

Even if that were true, then wouldn't you still want to understand what each text is actually saying within its own context? By erasing what Matthew teaches about Christology and replacing it with John's Christology, aren't you corrupting the message of Matthew that you believe God guided into canonization?

It's like you're making yourself the authority on scripture rather than the texts themselves. I think that's usually considered blasphemy.

Btw...if you are into stoicism...why is this of interest to you? Is not your philosophy one of self in that you believe in works based elevation of self...ie if I live an ethical life...???

No, my philosophy is not about believing in works-based elevation of self. I have no idea where you got such nonsense from.

The Bible in the book of James says the complete opposite to stoicism...James says our works are but filthy rags.

The Bible also says that cows will give birth to striped calves if they look at striped sticks and that the earth existed before the sun. I caution against believing everything you read in it.

 

[Ella S.]

we disagree, our English term "ANOTHER, compare to the Greek
[ 1,,G243 G2087 ,allos heteros ] have a difference in meaning, which despite a tendency to be lost, is to be observed in numerous passages. Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort;" heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes "another of a different sort." do you understand that definition? my source is the Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

do you understand "ANOTHER" as G243 Allos? especially in a numerical difference.

study that definition, and then read John in comparison to Matthews, Mark, or Luke...... (smile).

101G.

This is... not relevant to anything I said.

 

[rational experiences]

A man theist said.

God being rock. You cannot discuss God unless it owns. Body type of its own flesh...
Rock.

Owned no other spirit.

The evil birth from within its own body was hell. The body mass volcano.

So spirit gas came out of that mass type only. A volcano not a sun.

Space Infinite nothing by emptiness cold pressure conceived a new form of gods inheritor. Clear gas. The immaculate.

Exactly known.

Origin space law owned clear gases.

Then the evil body Inferred as the sun exploded. Just like earth it had sealed and cooled by space laws. Then it released mass.

Mass exploded out of the sun. Not spirit a gas like earth.

Earth nothing like a sun said the correct scientist.

Moons are our proof. Space law owned O highest form very ancient.

So origin eternal infinite space law is gone. Replaced by its broken law.

Hence Infinite eternal states no further change to mass is supported.

Pretty basic human taught holy law.

 

[Fool]

Oh my. what did Moses ask God? "What is your name" and God Gave him exactly what he asked, no more or less.

do you understand the difference between "WHAT" is a person name vs "Who" is a person name? do you!. let's see. if 101G ask you "WHAT" is the first woman's name. if you said "Eve" you would be in ERROR. because that's not "WHAT" her name is ... no "WHAT" her name is .... Adam... Oh yes, because that's "WHAT" her name is. supportive scripture, Genesis 5:1 "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;" Genesis 5:2 "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created."

understand, "WHAT" she is in mane is a Adam, because the name Adam describes ... "WHAT: she is.

now, if 101G would have asked you, "WHO" was the First woman name, the correct answer would be "EVE" because that's who she is in name, and not "WHAT" she is in name. SEE THE DIFFERENCE NOW?

go back and read what Moses ask God ...... "WHAT" is your name. and God gave him just what he asked for. "I AM", that's "WHAT" he, God is..... I AM KING, I AM LORD, I AM Saviour, IAM Redeemer.... ect.... these are "WHAT" GOD is in Name.

now if Moses would have asked God, "Who are you in Name", God would have answer, "YESHUA/JESUS"

know and understand the difference in "WHAT" vs "WHO" in a NAME.

101G.

Thou shall not take the Lord's name in vain. What is the Lord's name?

 

[rational experiences]

My owned advice came from my life attacked.

I'm living in a humans biology exact all human....and I'm human consciousness.

To tell stories I have to be a human. A human capable of thin king. Theist human lived with a total understanding of human imposed science.

The human hurt wasn't a theist of science. Why you got away with it for some time before humans started to awake.

Reason humans suffering hadn't All healed. When healed returned biology got sick they realised the advice of old was real.

Same circumstance now.

Pretty basic why the bible isn't scientific theories by conditions the sciences....stories symbols reactions chemicals dusts machine building or those types. Exact science. By worded human only explanations.

It's only Inferred themes

Exact science is never about or involving the human.

So then a Human argues. Says but if a human wasn't living science isn't practiced. No he argues...science he says owns all the reasons why anything exists. Even if I don't exist.

Nonsensical in fact.

And he believes that comment as his human words make the claim.

Therefore once men said the intelligence of space maths womb female sciences is not allowed to be studied.

Today confused he proves he doesn't read or heed his own man humans advice. Outlaws women's intellectual learning yet man still practices which he infers to his past..mans sciences. Actually the occult science about female space womb was the intelligence

So today men working on the road outside yelled out bankruptcy.

Guess what... my husband was made redundant today. Told he's on garden leave.

Geez those humans using the pre machine state mind coercion cannot be happy with my forums answers.

They wanted my life to be the machine they built. And a reaction only a human reacts inside the machine. What studies they human infer is only about their machine science.

About machines as science.

I'm not a machine nor a machines reaction. No comparison even exists.

I truly wonder why you believe you're intelligent.