<quote>

" Milesoftheusa

Joined Fri 10/27/06
Posts: 1634
Wed 06/11/08 05:07 PM
As far as the people of the bible believing the world was flat that is a foriegn concept at least up untill after the 1st century. we have been told about columbus and the thinking that the world was flat. by that time the continuity of the scriptures had been poluted to where man was making his own judgements about the world he lived in. i still would not believe that the people we know as the jews today would of ever of thought that. As the Prophet Isaiah clearly gives a clear description of the world that was created for them to live in..

Isa 40:22-23
22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers ,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
23 He brings the princes to nothing;
He makes the judges of the earth useless.
NKJV

the circle of the earth and as a tent is a very good description of our earth and atmosphere.


The teaching of Yahshua may of been seen as ratical but mainly by the Religious authority that did not like the power he was taking away from them. Yahshua continually showed them thier hypocracies in front of the people to where they were afraid to even ask him a question. Doing so thier next act to save themselves as the governing authority over the people was to bring him in to secret to where the people could not see what was going on. Then putting him up with a murderer brought the people back under thier control as they seen Yahshua as not capable of over ruling those who were in power.

Yahshua's own words own words tells us his coming was to show us that the commandments of men was what was being taught and ruled by. he showed it was not by man but by spirit does all man is justified by. the commandments of Yahweh and the ways of Yahweh were to be followed. That by this spirit of truth was the prophets inspired to warn the people and the people through faith had this same ability. the priesthood had been corrupted.

Matt 5:17-20

"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
NKJV
Yahshua is telling us nothing will be changed as long as this world is here. We have been taught that the word..FULLFILL means done away yet the word by what is said in the rest of the chapter takes on the meaning of AMPLIFICATION OR AMPLFY.
John 12:44-13:1

44 Then Yahshua cried out and said, "He who believes in Me, believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me. 45 And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me. 46 I have come as a light into the world, that whoever believes in Me should not abide in darkness. 47 And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. 48 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him — the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day. 49 For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak. 50 And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak."
He tells the people clearly THE WORD THAT HE HAS SPOKEN WILL JUDGE HIM. This word was the Spirit of the LAW AND THE PROPHETS.

NKJV

Luke 5:36-39

36 Then He spoke a parable to them: "No one puts a piece from a new garment on an old one; otherwise the new makes a tear, and also the piece that was taken out of the new does not match the old. 37 And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the wineskins and be spilled, and the wineskins will be ruined. 38 But new wine must be put into new wineskins, and both are preserved. 39 And no one, having drunk old wine, immediately desires new ; for he says, 'The old is better.'"
NKJV
This is an interesting parable as it speaks of wine and wine skins. This is spoken directly to the WORD OF YAHWEH. Condemning the priesthood at that time. The tear is the tear of the temple that would be accomplished as the wine is the blood of this new covenant. he is telling us you can not take and choose what it is you want and do not want as this will split the believer and cause a split in the kingdom and it will fall. Directly letting The scribes and The pharasees know what is coming to them. The Spirit comes and the new is put in the New Skins of Yahweh's House.
Luke 24:25-27

25 Then He said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Ought not the messiah to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?" 27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
NKJV

John 8:28

28 Then said Yahshua unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
KJV
This lifting up is the Lifting up of the tree in the desert whom Moses lifted up and all who looked upon it was healed from the serpants that was biting at them. This being satans hold on the people is done away if you will only look upon messiah Yahshua for your strength.
John 8:39-40

39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Yahshua saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of Yahweh: this did not Abraham.
KJV

yahshua continually spoke of "It was not so in the beginning. Yet Abraham who u trust in son's was spared you will not spare me as you are not Abraham's children.

Everything continues as it has from the beginning. you killed the prophets i sent to u and you have killed the son of man. Nothing new has Yahweh ever brought out to be a burden to the people. The Law and The Prophets are the Same Yesterday Today and Tommorrow. So is Yahshua as he followed them and they spoke of him.

Thier was no radical change. this is what is wrong in our learning of the scriptures is thier was change. This is nothing more than man wanting to tell the People what to do and not do. The Spirit taught Yahshua taught the prophets and will teach you if you will open your Heart to it and let the Spirit of truth reside in u. but we believe that we must come up with some new way. Children do not need a new way. They learn the basics and then go on to eat the meat of the word. Not the other way around..


here is an example of modern day worship that the scriptures say worship death. See if you can recognize them? Blessings Miles




Isa 28:11-15
1 For with stammering lips and another tongue
He will speak to this people,
12 To whom He said, "This is the rest with which
You may cause the weary to rest,"
And, "This is the refreshing";
Yet they would not hear.
13 But the word of Yahweh was to them,
"Precept upon precept, precept upon precept,
Line upon line, line upon line,
Here a little, there a little,"
That they might go and fall backward, and be broken
And snared and caught.

14 Therefore hear the word of Yahweh, you scornful men,
Who rule this people who are in Jerusalem,
15 Because you have said, "We have made a covenant with death,
And with Sheol we are in agreement.
When the overflowing scourge passes through,
It will not come to us,
For we have made lies our refuge,
And under falsehood we have hidden ourselves."
NKJV


If you read on it speaks of the 2 witnesses who will be a Terror to all these people. No wonder they are hated..








<<< Miles >>>

Darwin tried to fool everybody in his book Origin of Species by changing the work KIND to Species. Then lastly, we are encouraged to believe in micro-evolution. This is changes with the KINDS. Animals can produce a whole variety of offspring, long hair, short hair, long legged, short legged, that happens.

But the first five are purely religious. Cosmic evolution, chemical evolution, stellar and planetary evolution, organic evolution, macro evolution, are all religion not science. We never have observed any of those in action. So to be a good witness for the Creator and stand firm in a debate, define first what you are debating as far as these evolution theories go? You will find that evolutionist give examples of # 6 only, micro evolution. Changes with the dog family. Problem is the debater usually implies micro-evolution is evidence for the other 5. It is not evidence.

The teachers are taught to stress the earth is billions of years old, make sure the kids believe this since the intention is that if you have enough time anything can happen. But if these haven’t happened in all the years man has been observing creation why should anyone believe it is going to happen tomorrow.

Don’t you think in science class, we should be teaching science. The results, of clear observations. Things we can observe and test and study and demonstrate. Things like the 1st law of thermodynamics.

The scientific law, not theory, tells us “Matter cannot be created or destroyed.” If matter cannot be created or destroyed then how did the world get here? “Were here, you know” So that leaves on 2 choices. 1) Somebody made the world or 2) The world made itself. You can believe the Bible, which says God made the world with his hands, or can believe the humanists who say the world created itself.

Humanists regard the universe as “self-existing and not created.” This quote is from the Humanist Manifesto Tenet#1. Well, if the world made itself how could this happen? The devil thought for along time and finally he came up with the big bang theory. It is rather obsurd what is published today and being taught to our kids.

“Earth has changed.” In addition to (the planets) physical changes, life too, has evolved on earth.” The word evolved is a very tricky word. There are 6 meanings to the word and only one meaning is scientific. When someone speaks to you regarding evolution ask them what they mean? For some speak of cosmic evolution: The origin of time, space and matter. Also referred to as the Big Bang. Some believe it, I don’t. Then there is chemical evolution: The origin of higher elements from hydrogen the big band was to produce hydrogen and some helium, but how did we get the other 105 elements? Did they evolve? Are we to believe uranium evolved from hydrogen?

The 3rd theory is stellar and planetary evolution: The origin of stars and planets. How did the star form? No one has even seen a star form. Scientists don’t even have a clue how a star could form. There are not even good theories on how a star could form. What happens all the time is vona and supernova, and that is when a star explodes. Man is constantly looking into the heavens and we see the stars exploding, not forming. Did you know that there are enough stars that every person on earth could claim 1 trillion stars for their own. Those are the ones we know about, thanks to the Hubble Telescope and fast computers. (psalm 147) tells us the “Lord determines the number of the stars and calls each by name. Great is our Lord and mighty in power; His understanding has no limit.” Wow he named them all, has anyone named 11 trillion?

Fourthly there is organic evolution: the origin of life. Life had to get started from non-living material. Even today, nobody has a clue how that could happen. Then are are told
Page 3

about macro-evolution. That is where an animal changes to different kinds of animals. Nobody has ever seen a dog poduce anyting but dogs.

The Pretae Hall General Science book say “about 18 to 20 billion years ago all the matter in the universe was concentrated into one very dense, very hot region that may have been smaller then a period on this page. For some unknown reason the region exploded. This explosion called the Big Bang goes on to say this is how the galaxies formed in the universe. By the way universe is form from 2 latin words uni-means single verse- means spoken sentence. Did you know we live in a single spoken sentence? “God said let there be.” But that is so different from the public school science book which says 18 to 20 billion years ago all the matter in the universe was concentrated into a dot on this page. What? That is one crowded dot. Do you see this planet squished into the tip of your pen? That isn’t the end of it. EarthScience text book say after many billions of years, all the matter and energy will once again be packed into a small area. This area may be no longer then the period at the end of this sentence. Then another big bang will occur. Can you believe they cut down a tree to print that? Where’s Al Gore when you need him.

Honestly if you believe that then what is the use of living anyway if were just going to explode. Those words are not from the God that loves you, but your enemy who hates you, who says if your are told lies over and over you will believe them.
This text book author was brilliant, he says, “Nothing really means nothing.” He said not only would mass and energy disappear, but also space and time.

However, physicists theorize that from the state of nothingness the universe began. The universe began in a gigantic explosion. What? He is telling us that one day nothing exploded and here we are. Discover Magazine a few years ago wrote, “The universe burst into something from absolutely nothing, zero, nada. And as it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nothing nowhere. How is that possible? Ask Alan Guth. His theory of inflation helps explain everything! He went on to say in Scientific American, “We all came from a dot and a dot came from nothing, they call that science.

EGADS I respect your intelligence but I really see this as an off topic wordplay argument. I failed to see your point, many cultures throuout the world viewed the world as a flat round circle I didn't see anything about a ball or sphere but I could be getting tired I've been reading over posts for an hour or two without a break.

My original point whether worded well or badly was that the ancient peoples per what we know lacked extensive knowledge about the entire world and as a populace when considered as a local target audience would be spoken to by an intended speaker considering their knowledge and or that of the speaker. To consider that an ancient man in a local area even if well educated would write all inclusive statements about people around the entire globe would be by my PERSONAL opinion complete folly. They wrote of what they knew. To write about astral physics, the peoples of the Americas, or far off lands would be something they would lack imagination for per everything I understand.

I was saying that if the bible is read as a justification of prejudice it lacks any especially since the writers of the passages and the intended audience within the ancient world lacked (except perhaps in special cases) any knowledge of the peoples from around the world in totality or the future of mankind.

So far as the passages being written by God they were written by the men that the gospels are named after, or others on their behalf. If there was any part of the bible that was magically materialised, written on parchement by a phsycial manifestation of the hebrew god, or written by someone being possessed (not filled, possessed without their own consciousness) by the hebrew god in order to write the passages themselves I missed it completely and am unaware of it.

Man existed in the world of God, to say that God the father of the hebrews wrote the bible is blasphemy per my understanding claiming that one of those men WERE God. Now if God had special communication with these men that's well and good, but I understood that they did much of the writing in many cases long after the fact and that was my point. WORSHIP YOUR GOD, NOT THE MAN WHO supposedly speaks for him. I am simply making a distinction between God and man, divine holy presense and his representatives who are decidedly NOT God because if they were that would REALLY turn christianity into another form of polytheism.

I'm all for his worship, I'm all for the following of Christ, but I think the claim that he was roaming around earth, writting passages, and present in physical form overseing the piecing together of the bible and unedited inclusion of passages ranging over a great distance of time deciding which were used and which were left out is just too much. Notice I said I THINK. You can think or believe what you wish, but I say the bible is the work of men, and that because of that it is falible. Proof can be found in the fact that even in small ways even the writings of the disciples do not agree about all facts. (I cite the bloodline of Jesus as an interesting and theory shattering example if it can be considered a small detail in any way). If you want to prove otherwise you are going to have to pull a magical burning book out of your pocket and show it to the world because these arguments about the divine nature of the bible lack any historical backing. The only thing that this would prove by the way is that the hebrew god has no more accuracy than the men that follow him if he did indeed write the whole thing. I see all of this as a pointless argument that distracts from the original point. It is a book meant to bring people to a god or spirituality, rather than a book written by a god.

interesting. And i can see where you get your information as this is what has been taught for a very long time. i am no chr-stian. i am a Yahwists of the Way. You point that the linguage of Yahshua is flawed. Well i guess i will pull a burning book out of my hat maybe with a rabbit attached. ( not u wabbit) the paleo hebrew is in new mexico written by the what we assume to be by the American Indian. YHWH is written thier. i am sure you have not been schooled to the true name of the messiah as JC well it's not a good name. yahshua means just as the writers and prophets said. Yah saves is it's basic meaning. I would assume you believe that we are saved by the son. Yet he never said that. he said the saving name. Yahweh saves. Everyone who calls upon the name of Yahweh shall be saved. is very distinctive throughout the scriptures.now the verses I quoted I understand you do not see the significance of them. the circle of the earth and a tent. now when in the last century did man figure out our eco system that we are actually in a greenhouse. the heat is kept in. now i do not believe that 3000 years ago man knew more about the earth than we do now. Do u? then how were these writers inspired to write such a thing. Around the time of Yahshua's death The American indian speaks of the Great White Spirit that came and taught them. Now where did the American Indian come from? do u have any idea? many discoveries are being made that are making scientists of today scratch thier heads. The scriptures were inspired for man to write. they were told what was good for food and what is not. now the humanism thought untill recent years was a rare steak was fine to eat. the AMA even said beef blood did not hurt you. what were the inspired writers told. Life is in the Blood. do not eat it or the fat. took along time for modern medicine to figure this out.The crossing of seeds was not to be done. Well we have been big on this and still say this is good yet we have food scares of saminala all the time.. I really wonder why? They say home grown is fine though. Wow Modern man has all the answers.The phenician people of the bible were known to be great sailors. within the last few years on the East coast they have unearth a settlement that has anteint phenecian writings. Very well they probally knew paleo hebrew. So what is significant about this. they have dated the writings to 3200 years ago. people sailed across the Ocean that long ago. then 200 years later the Hebrew Consanants for the Hebrew diety YHWH shows up on a rock that is a tourist attraction in New Mexico. Alot of conquincese. Nineveh was untill 20 years ago by theologians said to be a mystical place.it never was. They found Nenevah. Guess what was at the entrance to the city and what it said. A statute of Jonah and his saving of thier people. recently with satalite tech. trade routes mentioned in the Bible could not be found. Guess what the sat. found them exactly as the bible said they were. You may believe the scriptures are not the inspired word of yahweh. I wonder what proof it takes for something to be considered proof of anything. This what u say is all prophecied will happen. Peter said that before yahshua comes back that thier would be mockers dening the very existance of yahweh. We sure do have alot of that. I have on these threads try to get people to show me contradictions before. after a few posts I am told i am being un fair because i am using the Bible as my reference. Imagine that. the thing u do not see and most do not want to see. Is if you rely solely on the Nt and Through out the original Scriptures u will have no idea what they say because anyone can make them say whatever they want to. yea 1000 = denominations in the U S. i wonder why. I am ready for any questions because I Know and BELIEVE the SCRIPTURES to be INSPIRED by OUR CREATOR. So i do not Doubt as u apperently do.I have seen miracles I have been saved by certain Death.But the Biggest miracle of all is to see mankind Believe. Which Yahweh will not enterfere unless we do as ninevah and cover ourselves with the ashes of the Earth and repent. Ashes to Ashes Dust to Dust. we are admitting what we really are then and thats when Yahweh will listen to your Cry. Shalom...miles

hi deb, read a post i made in general forum called "cosmolgy and cosmologist" this will give you more insite as to other theories more advanced than what you speak of, thnx

What you wrote here although can be lacking in conveyence actually makes a bit of sense I just happen to disagree.

First and foremost it indicates you misunderstood what I was saying originally. I was talking about a target Audience for written passages. If books of the bible were written over a long perdiod of time all of the writers and indented audiences would be different. Over time culture and knowledge changes. A large part of inconsistancies would be in that books would be written by different people, for different cultural audiences of the times. Because of this if a statement is made, it should be considered in the context of the intended audience rather than the context of what modern people know.

Your statement about the passages quoted actually eludes to the fact that much of the native knowledge was lost through deflamation or destruction. Althought this is true, and that there were many visionaries throughout ancient history the discussion was in fact about the bible.

So far as what countries had been visited or what a people knew, it varied from one area to another. A hebrew may have known nothing about a phonecian other than hearsay rumor and vise versus because believe it or not they lacked an instant communication network. Travel in the ancient world was commonplace but was a much more difficult ordeal than it is for modern peoples. Over time knowledge of entire cultures was lost other than in rumor, scattered texts, ect.

In the modern world to this day we are still trying to unravel the mysteries of the past and may never know the truth about many things.

All of this has nothing to do with belief unless you want to just go wtih the blind faith is rewarded theory, which with or without merrit has zero validity within talking about particulars about the creation of the bible, or any other ancient work or artifact.

Now when you say you believe the scriptures were inspired by the creator that is different from saying the creator wrote them itself which is the matter of distinction I was making. Either you believe the creator wrote them itself, or that men wrote them.

Many ancient texts throughout the entire world included divine knowledge that is puzzling to modern man, but everything you have said ignores my original point without grasping it.

IF there was divine knowledge in cultures outside of those creating the bible, and people propose to ignore or destroy everything not from the bible, supporting the bible, or about the bible in the way they understand then they are ignoring the beliefs of all other cultures, and attempting cultural genocide.

Per Christians who believe that you must follow the bible or perish, there is no meaning or significance to the pale one, and his followers would be nothing more than heathen pagans. HE did not hold significance, because the writings that he was found in had nothing to do with the culture that the bible was written in. Whether it was Jesus, A equivilant, a brother, or opponent doesn't occur to these people because they don't care. All they care about is that it is NOT the Jesus the bible teaches about, therefore not valid which is what we were discussing.

Citing Modern proof of global travel such as the travels of phonecians or lief Erricson do nothing for this argument because even if they are historically proven to a blind faith bible thumper they don't matter. NO Culture outside of that one that created the bible has any spiritual significance or rights per this type of hostile person practicing spiritual prejudice.

Even if I know and understand about ancient American history including rare cases such as a tribe of anglo native Americans (A lost expepidition of explorers that settled in the US permenantly and was "lost in history") it is meaningless in a discussion about the blind faith following of a book that was written in a specific geographical area and limited to writers of that area and an audience in that area.

I as an individual interested in free information and non-judgemental spirituality understand the points you have brought up, I just fail to see how they effect what I originally said taken in context. I never said the ancient peoples could not travel or explore. I simply said that the populace knowledge of all of the peoples in the world failed to exist and that when the texts of the bible are considered they should be considered in their ancient local context. IF someone ever mentioned the word Pagan in biblical texts it was meant to signify country folk (which is the origin of the word) or a local sect of individuals as opposed to all groups currently labeled as pagan in the modern world. The context of texts must be considered to understand their full meaning. It is absolutely silly to assume that the ancient populace as a generalized group had even a fraction of the worldwide knowledge that a modern child does.

I am seeing everything you are saying, but are you hearing what I am saying?

Shalome, Namaste',love and light, blessings, or whatever is appropriate for your particular view of the world.

ok.. i c u see very little signifcance of what the scriptures i talked about mean.

Prophecy do you believe that i can show you prophecied text that most have never heard speaking directly to us? Would that be a finite abstract that would show a worldly view?

What is the difference in knowledge and laws of health being inspired for a prophet to write and the actual hand of Yahweh?

If you tell a co worker who u r in charge of to go tell his fellow co workers a specific job to do. Would the co workers he went to and said you said do this be any different than you telling them yourself?

The rank of command in the military would have a tough time if the general had to write out every order.

I will write more later and try to see if we can get on the same page . right now something personal has come up and i need to take care of it..Shalom...miles

I have personally seen these texts including texts that speak of the United States of America. I am far from being new to theological research. I still believe that these texts lack any indication that the (in some cases) the writer of the text, or the intended audience of that time had any understanding of a world outside of their own. The concepts used to convey events or details that were then considered imagry without comprehension can now be seen as shockingly clear. I find the subject extrmely interesting and have spent hours going over these texts.

To me the difference is simple and demonstrated by a game called pass it on. You sit down with a lager circle of people and don't tell them what you are doing. You then whisper something in the ear of the person next to you, and tell them to pass it on. By the time the whisper goes around an entire circle it may or may not have the same meaning, and usually the wording has changed. The chances of having undiluted word of god through human writers that are then translated repeatedly has the same problem so far as being too easily corrupted. Each human being involved in the process must convey concepts according to their personal understanding of the subject matter and the message. I am sure that most spiritual leaders or followers of truth would love to have a bible written personally by "God" in their language so they could directly receive his word but this deviates from the reality we live in.

yes, because I may have said for example "I want you to tell Fred to deal with this issue and once it is resolved report back to me." I may have done this having faith that Fred was the best person to handle this particular problem. However, the person I told about this was Sally. Sally has her own views of the problem and instead of passing on the same message says "Fred, I want you to address this problem by doing this, this, and this and let me know if that fixes it so we can report back to him.". In essense what I am asking to be done may be done, but not in the way I asked for it to be done because even if I thought Sally was a spectacular worker it is Fred i thought was best suited for this particular problem. (Hypothetical I used these names because I lack any people I actually know with these names).

wow!!!

whew!! BB, Miles, your wearing me out here.

i'm just now getting into your posts and wondering what your trying to accomplish? is it to show your intelligence? to make a point that you think has not been already made a thousand times before? or do you really believe that you will both end up better moral people or change someone's mind especially each other's? what is your reason's for this depth of religious philosophy? do you think you will understand each other better for sharing your belief's this way? or is this a game of wit's to see who will shine forth more spiritually?

please give me "SHORT" answers as to what you think this will accomplish you and the people here?? - in all sincerity - tribo.

LMAO they keep questioning me with different questions not understanding simple points so I've tried to keep answering I've found this part of it rather boring and tedius. It's a bit repetitive if you ask me...

If nobody understands your points, maybe you aren't being clear.

Hey ....

you morning ~ noon and night guys....


Take a breakkkkkkk ...


you must surely be seeing double by now...


sleep is a good thing...it renews us so well


especially those of you who are in Eastern time...


it is getting sooooo late for all of you ...


Give it a rest

& come back tomorrow


feeling at your best

ribo.

we see thing comepletly different even when i said the case of a generals orders being fullfilled. I do not take lightly any reference to the scriptures as man made. they are my life. i do not write as i have to most people. but when challenged to either accept a false pretence IMo to let it go or stand up and face it. i take into account many factors of eyes watching. many watch and few post. so its a either put up or shut up situation with what is really believable to whom i am accustomed with. i will be back like has been said much needed sleep.. Shalom...miles

hmmmm? put up or shut up - hmmmm???

i feel that statement is not of god but of man??

may i ask Miles - do you believe your book is capable of standing on it's own without your fervent support of it? I'll presume your answer is yes until i hear different from you.

Has it not stood for over 2000 yrs against the whordes of hell without falling? Again i'll presume yes.

Then what makes you think that I, blackbird, or other's can really say anything that would change peoples mind's who truly believe with all their hearts and mind's as fervently as you do?? i don't think that's possible, maybe other's do - but i don't. To me the core question is the existance of a monotheistic god - why - because it is this point of if he exsist or does not exsist, everything stands or falls - all else is merely argueing the facets of the diamond - with out the diamond at it's center the rest is just the opinion's of the observers.

And as i 've stated before an opinion and 50.00 will get you a half a cup of starbuck's coffee or a 1/4 of a gallon of gas

- peace/shalom/tribo

with prices these days ...


fifty bucks for starbucks & 1/4 gallon of gas...


sounds about right

but kidding aside for a second...



Tribo....you mentioned a few cool observations...


"Has it not stood for over 2000 yrs
against the whordes of hell without falling? "

Yes, the Gospel has withstood 2,000 years

To me, the core question
is the existance of a monotheistic god - why -

because it is this point of if he exist
or does not exist, everything stands or falls -


<Amen... >

all else is merely argueing the facets of the diamond -

with out the diamond at it's center

the rest is just the opinions of the observers.



<i believe that to be true...>



Christ is the Centerstone

http://www.crivoice.org/biblestudy/bb1pet2.html

The People of God - 1 Peter 2:4-10
The idea of spiritual growth being compared to the growth and maturation of a child has advantages and disadvantages. One of the disadvantages is that it can be seen as a purely individual matter, while spiritual growth always takes place in a community of believers. Part of Peter's concern was the individual spiritual growth of believers. He was also concerned with the spiritual growth of the churches to which he was writing. We tend to think that individual spiritual growth is most important and that the corporate spiritual growth of the body of Christ cannot happen until individual growth takes place. Peter would have seen both as happening together and both causing the other. For that reason he turns from the figure of speech of newborn babies to the figure of speech of the church as a building.

Verses 4 and 5 form a single sentence in the Greek text and the main subject and verb are in verse 5, you are being built into a spiritual house. (It is important when studying 1 Peter 2:4-10 to know that every "you" is plural - "you all.") Verse 4 states the condition that must be met if the readers and we are to be built into a spiritual house. It is as we are coming to Christ that we become part of the building God is constructing [some translations make this an imperative]. The Greek word coming not only meant to approach but it also carried overtones of worship. As we come in worship before Christ we will be built into a spiritual building.

Verse 4 also provides an important description of Christ. He is the living stone. The following phrase and its fuller quotation in verse 7 show that Peter derived the concept of Christ as stone from Psalm 118:22. The word living shows both the resurrection of Christ and his ability to give life to us. Christ is also rejected by men. The fact that Jesus was crucified in a cooperative effort of Jews and Romans and that his followers were being persecuted as this letter was written shows the truth of Peter's comment. In contrast to human rejection Christ was chosen and precious in God's sight.

Since Christ was a living stone and the readers have come to him then they too are living stones according to verse 5. It should be noted that the word for stone throughout this section is not the same as the word for Peter. Petros was a rock or rock formation protruding from the ground. The word stone in these verses is lithos which meant a stone already cut or dressed for use in building. As living stones we are being built into a spiritual house. The builder is God; Jesus is the foundation; and we are the building blocks carefully being constructed into a house for God.

The word house is often used in Biblical language for a temple. Paul had used similar language to describe the church in 1 Corinthians 3:9-17 and Ephesians 2:22. These passages are the basis of the New Testament doctrine of the church as a temple of God. The New Testament is not talking about a church building for there were no church buildings back then. Rather, we the people of the church are living stones and God is building a living temple in which he is worshipped. The following phrase confirms this. We are also a holy priesthood offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. Verse 9 extends the idea of priesthood by describing believers as a royal priesthood, often translated a kingdom of priests or the King's priesthood.

First Peter 2:5 and 9 are the primary basis for the concept of the priesthood of all believers, a doctrine especially important to Protestants. It is also a doctrine often misunderstood by Protestants. The popular understanding of the priesthood of all believers is that individuals do not need a priest since each person can be their own priest according to the priesthood of all believers. However, this was not the intent of either Peter or the first Protestants. The priesthood of all believers means that all believers are priests. Therefore any one of us can serve as a priest for anyone else. The idea of being a priest for oneself is contradictory; it misunderstands the meaning of priest. Each of us and all of us need a priest to represent us to God and God to us on a regular basis. The priesthood of all believers means that an appointed or ordained priest is not the only priest available. We are all capable of serving as a priest for each other. Further, we are all responsible to serve each other in priestly ways.

Peter returns in verse 6 to the idea of Jesus as a stone. He quotes Isaiah 28:16, which contains a speech by God against the rulers of Jerusalem who have disobeyed but who feel secure by their own devices, the political alliances they have forged. In the speech God compared himself to a builder building a new construction in Jerusalem. He will lay a cornerstone of his own choice and of high quality. The building will stand because of its firm foundation; anyone can put their trust in it and not be disappointed.

Peter identifies Christ as that cornerstone. The church is the new building that God is constructing and it is built on the foundation of Jesus. Anyone who trusts in Christ will not be disappointed or let down. The building will hold. Peter then notes in verse 7 that Jesus is precious to you who believe. On the other hand, to those who do not believe, "The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner." Verse 7 concludes with this quotation from Psalm 118:22. Peter has turned the analogy on its head. By normal analogy, if for those who believe Christ he is precious, then it ought to follow that for those who do not believe Christ he would be "not precious" or valueless. However, that is not Peter's logic. For those who do not believe, Christ has proved to be the opposite of their expectations.

Different translations and commentators take one of three positions regarding the meaning of Christ as head of the corner. The traditional understanding is represented by the translation, "chief cornerstone." This view believes that Jesus is being compared to the first stone laid in the construction of a building. The side walls are laid in alignment with its sides and the walls are built vertically plumb to the vertical edge of the cornerstone. Thus the three dimension lines of the chief cornerstone determine that the building is straight, square, and plumb.

Another interpretation, which is less likely, is that the head of the corner refers to a capstone. This view is adopted by the NIV. It compares Christ to the final stone place on the top of the wall that protects, dresses, and finishes the wall.

A third, and least likely, view is that the stone is the keystone of an arch. This is the top, center stone in a stone arch. It keeps all the other stones from caving in. It is best to understand Christ as the head of the corner in the first sense. The church that God is building with us as living stones takes its lines and angles from Jesus. Our task as living stones is to stay in line with him.

Peter continues his thought in verse 8 with a quotation from Isaiah 8:14. Though Jesus has become the head of the corner despite the unbelief of those who reject him, he is also a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense to them. Peter notes then that they stumble because they are disobedient to the message. To his readers who were facing persecution this was an important word. Disobedience by failing to persevere could rob them of the rich and precious relationship they were enjoying with Christ. Failure to obey could lead to eternal condemnation.

Verses 9-10 again describe the Gentile readers of 1 Peter in the language the Old Testament used for Israel. They were a chosen people. This concept is found throughout the Old Testament, but Isaiah 43:20 uses the exact words that appear here. The phrases royal priesthood or kingdom of priests and holy nation are both taken from Exodus 19:6. A people belonging to God or people of God's possession is an expression found in both Exodus 19:5 and Isaiah 43:21.

Verse 10 turns to Hosea 2:23 to describe the readers as people who were once not a people, but now you are the people of God. They are people who once had not received mercy but now you have received mercy. These words from Hosea were originally proclaimed to encourage Israel that God would redeem them from the punishment they had brought upon themselves. Peter beautifully turns the words to apply to Gentile churches. People whom the Jews called fuel for the fires of hell had become the people who belonged to God. In the final analysis the church is a community of grace. Only by God's great and gracious love for us do we exist as a community of faith. Because we have received mercy and grace without limit there must be a longing to share that mercy and grace with others.








i have much to do today away from the computer...


so i will have to bid you all adieu for now...



hava a good day everyone...

& May God Bless you all with Wisdom

& His Blessed Holy Spirit

hahaha think what you will R, but i am not thinking in christian term's - only in whether there is a creative diety at all and then - whether he would act in such a way as the god of the bible or not and if not how? - till this comes to light by me or other's everything else is a mute point - good day R,

i understand, tribo...



all i can do is present my feelings & thoughts...



people can either come up to the table and dine

or they can stay on the sidelines...



and we have to thank our Soldiers for covering our < butts >


and for risking their lives every second of every day


to give us these amazing freedoms we have

If u see my saying put up or shut up as man i would say u r right. just expressing why i would even go into these discussions in the 1st place. I really have not seen anything you have said as a problem.The scriptures will stand whether i am dead or alive. I am nothing but a servant to a king.That has the power of the universe.I try to obey him not out of forced labor but because I know he loves me and I love him. family. just standing up for family. You are right about the arguements. or i would hope an exchanging of beliefs or idea's that all may grow. I have found since last night that after reading some Bio's that the pride that is set forth in thier words about themselves has shown the real reason for debate.. not to strive for truth but to show folly and trickery to send out a message of a fool that others may hear. thats not for me. i want sincere discussion and like i said i have not noticed anything you have done as any problem with me. You find me taking up for pagans many times on these threads not because i agree with them. no it is because it is the right thing to do because so often we get personal with the person not the belief. personally if someone challenges what i believe welcome it. 1 or 2 things are going to happen for me and both are positive. i will find out i am wrong or have over looked something and gained knowledge that away. Or the studying and writing of it brings it to mind and i am stronger in my because of it. Either way it is a win win situation. i read from the same book yet have a total different aspect of it's meaning. I still believe it is devine as others. i just hope we all will open our minds and take in what is good fro us.. Blessings Of Shalom...Miles