1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Woe to those through whom come stumbling blocks

Discussion in 'Scriptural Debates' started by 2ndpillar, Jan 7, 2018.

  1. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    Paul indeed was a “spiritual man” as indicated by Revelation 16:13-16, for his spirit apparently was that of a demon, such that it was an “unclean spirit”, which is active today according to Revelation 16:13-16. I think you are confusing the “walking dead”, the “many”, who are walking toward “destruction”, with the “few” who found "life", the “narrow” ”way” (Matthew 7:13-14).

    As for Ezekiel 37:24, it is with respect to the “stick” of “Judah” and the “stick” of “Israel”, and they will all “keep My statutes” ,”forever” (Ezekiel 37:15-28). Your Gentiles, such as “strangers”, will “attach themselves to the house of Jacob”, as “servants” (Isaiah 14:1-2).
     
  2. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173
    Yeshua called Peter, "Satan" (Matthew 16:23) and a "stumbling block to me". Judas simply fulfilled Zechariah 11:13.
     
  3. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,236
    Ratings:
    +576
    Religion:
    Pragmatic Christian
    Because Peter was tempting Jesus with a path that was not permitted.
    Thus Jesus showed Peter what wrong he was committing. Once Peter understood this, he stopped. Peter became on of the primary disciples of Christ and this became evident shortly before his crucifixion. Judas was damned, the son of destruction.
    John 21:14-17 14 This was now the third time that Jesus appeared to the disciples after his being raised up from the dead. 15 When, now, they had breakfasted, Jesus said to Simon Peter: “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him: “Yes, Lord, you know I have affection for you.” He said to him: “Feed my lambs.” 16 Again he said to him, a second time: “Simon son of John, do you love me?” He said to him: “Yes, Lord, you know I have affection for you.” He said to him: “Shepherd my little sheep.” 17 He said to him the third time: “Simon son of John, do you have affection for me?” Peter became grieved that he said to him the third time: “Do you have affection for me?” So he said to him: “Lord, you know all things; you are aware that I have affection for you.” Jesus said to him: “Feed my little sheep. ​
    I am not sure where you get your ideas from, but they are not supported by scripture.

     
  4. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,775
    Ratings:
    +12,110
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    Who here says "the Bible is invalid", and also who says that if one accepts the basic ToE, as long as it's viewed that God was behind it all, that they "do not believe in God"?
     
  5. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    8,479
    Ratings:
    +586
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    Not at all! My understanding is based on a research of the issues and original texts, with one bias--if Rome put it forth, it's probably wrong!

    What I request from you is proof of your assertions.
     
  6. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    You miss the point of what Yeshua was doing. Matthew 5:17,” Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill With respect to Peter, he was made head of household and given keys of the house of David. That is the fulfillment of Isaiah 22:15-25, whereas the doppelganger of Peter is “Shebna” the “steward” in charge of the household (Isaiah 22:15), who had the keys of the “house of David” (Isaiah 22:22), and who would “shame” the “master’s house” (Isaiah 22:18), and when he opened, no one could shut (Isaiah 22:22), and be replaced by the pope, the doppelganger of “Eliakim”, who “in that day”, would “fall”, and anyone hanging on to him, would be “cut off”.

    The doopelganger of Peter with respect to feeding, caring, and tending the sheep, was the “staff” called “Cords”, who would be the “worthless shepherd” (Zechariah 11:17), who would not “feed, care, or tend the sheep”, and who would “leave the sheep”(Acts 15:7). “Cords” would be one of the “staffs” taken to “pasture the flock doomed for slaughter” (Zechariah 11:7). That “flock” would be the flock of Peter and Paul, the “Christian” church. What we are waiting for now is for that "house"/church to "fall" (Matthew 7:25-28).
     
    #46 2ndpillar, Jan 9, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2018
  7. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,775
    Ratings:
    +12,110
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    Then ya better just throw your Bible away as its canon was chosen by that same element under Constantine's mandate.

    What so many here get twisted around is the issue of "interpretation", namely blindly accepting what they've been taught versus realizing that every single religion and every single denomination bases its theology on how they interpret the scriptures.

    IOW, with house values it's "location, location, location", but with theological beliefs it's "interpretation, interpretation, interpretation". Unfortunately, so many have not learned that lesson, thus taking a "my way or the highway" approach.
     
  8. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    Well, you have made the point. “If Rome put it forth, it is probably wrong”.

    Your present, generally accepted canon was first put forth by Athanasius, the Roman Catholic bishop of Alexandria, in the year 367 A.D. Athanasius on the Canon of Scripture

    Your “original text” was a product of the “daughter of Babylon”, the Roman church, of whom Constantine instituted that church at his convened Council of Nicaea, and Athanasius was a member of that Council, and was instrumental in the pagan dogma of the Trinity.
     
  9. pcarl

    pcarl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,628
    Ratings:
    +1,476
    Religion:
    Catholic
    I think you have made your perspective on biblical things quite clear in your first post on this thread which tells me that you assume everything in Scripture happened the way it is written and are threatened when the most basic statements of the Christian Creed are found not to be historically verifiable.
    Revelation is complete but our understanding is never complete, and it must speak anew for each generation within its own 'Sitz im Leben' (sits in life) in which Christians continue to face stumbling blocks to the faith.
     
  10. 74x12

    74x12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2017
    Messages:
    2,838
    Ratings:
    +689
    Religion:
    Itiswhatitis
    It's amusing to me that you quote Acts as evidence against Peter; knowing it was written by Luke the friend of Paul. Either it's trustworthy or it isn't.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. 74x12

    74x12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2017
    Messages:
    2,838
    Ratings:
    +689
    Religion:
    Itiswhatitis
    If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?
     
  12. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    According to Luke 1:1-3, Luke simply was a hearsay witness, taking statements from other unknown people, and apparently, one of his sources was the false prophet Paul. I would not build a house with what comes out of his mouth, but it has value as an insight into what was going on at the time. It doesn’t necessarily have to be true or even consistent, which it is not. But you are stuck with it.
     
  13. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    The only one I have referred to having the demon spirit of Beelzebub, the Lord of the Flies, is Hussein Obama, with his affinity to have flies in his face, and his “gathering of the nations” to Har-Magedon, to “capture””Jerusalem”(Revelation 16:13-16). That story is ongoing. As for his family, let us keep his kids out of this. On the other hand, his wife is fair game. She is kind of a sister type to Hillary. Hopefully she will fade into the sunset. Keep in mind, it was Yeshua, who called Peter, "Satan". (Matthew 16:23).
     
  14. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    Well if you are able to explain what “the Gospel is”, then please go for it. Is it “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand”, built on a “tested stone” with “justice the measuring line”, and “righteousness the level”, (Isaiah 28:16-17) or is it Paul’s gospel of Grace, or in other words, the gospel of unmerited favor?
     
  15. 74x12

    74x12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2017
    Messages:
    2,838
    Ratings:
    +689
    Religion:
    Itiswhatitis
    Satan means adversary, at that time Peter was wrong in his attitude and because he wasn't thinking of eternal glory with God, but worldly glory and therefore was called Satan. It's because he considered the cross too shameful for Yeshua instead of glory with God.

    But if Peter is as bad as you claim and never changed into a better sort of disciple; then why did Yeshua judge him worthy to die the same martyrs death as Himself? (John 21:18-19)
    Remember, that Yeshua considered it honor and glory with God to die on the cross even though it appeared shameful to the unspiritual mind. So, why would Yeshua judge this for Peter?
     
  16. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,236
    Ratings:
    +576
    Religion:
    Pragmatic Christian
    The claim that Peter was given a position that became the Pope's I have never accepted. My interpretation of these issues differ from that claim. I don't think Peter understood it to mean that either.

    As to the Pope, in my view, the thing that happened to that church fulfilled the prophecy of apostasy that had to come. Their inclusion of many pagan customs and what not is not what Christians are taught in the NT.
     
  17. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,775
    Ratings:
    +12,110
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    If I can butt in a bit.

    That teaching was evident when Ignatius told Clement in a letter dated in the very early 2nd century that the Bishop of Rome had a special designation as Rome was the place for the martrydom of both Paul and Peter.

    Essentially the church tried to keep the general format that Jesus and the apostles had going with one spiritual head. However, there was no binding power back then that the Bishop of Rome had outside of his area. However, the title "Pope" was not used until a few centuries later.

    The Jesus' statement about guiding the church until the end of time turned out to be false? Also, just a reminder that it was this church that chose the canon that you use.

    Anyhow, sorry to butt in as I felt a compulsion to explain a couple of things, so now you can "go back to your regularly scheduled program". ;)
     
    #57 metis, Jan 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2018
  18. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    Peter, who is referred to as “Cords”(Zechariah 11;14), was “annihilated”(Zechariah 11:8), wrapped by his own cord belt to a cross, to fulfill Zechariah 11:8, whereas Peter , the “worthless shepherd”(Zechariah 11:17), was annihilated in “one month", one generation, with Judas Iscariot (Zechariah 11:13), and the false prophet Paul, called “Favor”, because of his false gospel of grace (Zechariah 11:10), which means unmerited favor of God. All was done to “fulfill” the Law and the testimony per Matthew 5:17. Yeshua’s testimony was the “Spirit of prophecy”, per Revelation 19:10. His statement regarding Peter, was prophetic. “You are a stumbling block to me” was a prophetic statement.
     
  19. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173

    In Isaiah 22:15-25, Peter’s doopelganger, Shebna, the “head steward” of the “house of David”, who had the keys of the house, who “when he opens no one could shut”, shamed his “master’s house”, was deposed, and the keys were passed to Eliakim, the doopelganger of the pope, who “in that day” will “fall”, and those “hanging” on to him will be “cut off”. Hanging on to Peter, or the pope, is not a wise decision. As for you understanding what Peter thought is irrelevant. Peter was not chosen because he was a thinker, he was chosen because of his inflated ego, to fulfill the role he was to play. As for the “apostasy that had to come”, per Yeshua in Matthew 26:31, he quoted Zechariah 13:7, and it was with respect to the falling away, which was initiated by Peter (Matthew 26:33).
     
  20. 74x12

    74x12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2017
    Messages:
    2,838
    Ratings:
    +689
    Religion:
    Itiswhatitis
    Jesus considered it an honor to die on the cross. I do not think He would have chosen this death for Peter if Peter was not honorable. (Matthew 16:24)

    Even the Torah talks about unmerited favor. In Deut. 7:8 we see that God simply loved them without reason and also He chose them because of His oaths. But the first reason God lists is unmerited love and secondly because He would keep His promises.

    That's not what Rev. 19:10 is talking about. John was about to worship the messenger that was speaking prophetically to him as the mouth piece of God. The messenger stopped him and explained that he was not God himself but was delivering the testimony of Jesus through the Spirit of prophecy.
     
Loading...