Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

[iouae]

I take it "number eleven" was your avatar? Is that "Dodger"? If so I kinda thought something like that since you just changed to that avatar in the past few days, (as far as I have noticed but I suppose I could be wrong). I see you take it very seriously so I will refrain from further jest.

I could not get a picture of Dodger. He was by far the best looking alpa male I have ever seen, and with a totally friendly disposition. I added my avatar in honour of Dodger.

I don't take anything seriously Daqq. But I appreciate being able to express my frustration to you.

Unfortunately for the baboons, us hippie tree-huggers are not able to work together, so "the man" has gotten away with it for years. But I may just buy a sheet, and paint my tag-line on it, and stage a one-man demonstration at the traffic lights, if I can get my "I am mad as Hell and not going to take this any more" mojo going

 

[daqq]

I could not get a picture of Dodger. He was by far the best looking alpa male I have ever seen, and with a totally friendly disposition. I added my avatar in honour of Dodger.

I don't take anything seriously Daqq. But I appreciate being able to express my frustration to you.

Unfortunately for the baboons, us hippie tree-huggers are not able to work together, so "the man" has gotten away with it for years. But I may just buy a sheet, and paint my tag-line on it, and stage a one-man demonstration at the traffic lights, if I can get my "I am mad as Hell and not going to take this any more" mojo going

Okay, groovie babie, I'm not a hippie tree-hugger but I hear ya.
However, since we are now way off-topic, I'll leave it at this for here and now.

 

[2003cobra]

Hurt a lot did it? You PREVIOUSLY said it didn't :think: As nicely as I can, "Can you PLEASE make up your mind?"

Thanks. -Lon

No, didn’t hurt at all.

It does reveal that you have been extremely testy.

And it revealed a lot more about you.



I suppose I should clarify, now that it has been long enough since you made your predictions. My grades were excellent in the first 12 years (actually 11, as I skipped a grade). And I graduated with honors from Georgia Institute of Technology and proceeded on into the MBA program at Georgia State University while working full time and serving as an Army Reserve officer.

So it didn’t hurt at all because it was all wrong. And I appreciated your saying these things because they revealed your insecurity and lack of capability to defend your false doctrine. You couldn’t defend your views so you had to attack me. In that, you went hunting but took the wrong dog.

Now, what about Jairus? Going to discuss the scriptures or further confirm that you cannot defend your position?

 

[2003cobra]

First, and shown here, it is because they second-guess about everything THEN accuse of all things, THEN assume THEY took the high ground. lain: See? I can't win and there is no point. It is nearly always this conversation THIS way. Next: Look at the thread... AND I'm no prophet. It is just a very predictable pattern. I get to be 'unholy' while you get to be 'holier than thou.' See, I don't really care about academic degrees, just studious and a willingness to do as scripture says and walk a mile with those you disagree with. A Charismatic NEVER does this. You are in a world where pedestals are created. We have some well-knowns on our side and they are all about being 'studious.' Your side? Who has a specific 'gift' especially the 'exceptional' ones. Everybody gets a heyday in the Charismatic church, they just have to express one.

See what I mean? Your world is conjecture AND most of you want to believe the conjecture. It is more 'sensational' and, of course "charismatic" to do so. It is fraught with emotionalism AND emotionalism in guise of spirituality.
A couple of you have even given the 'trust me, I'm a (fill-in charismatic office blank). It is an 'asserting' and 'lording over' position. I don't believe Apostles are extent today. It is a stark world of contrast. We really don't have much of a meeting of ways and there is not much point. Perhaps rather a thread "Conservative OR Charismatic."

Untrue. Read back a few posts. I out-quote you scripture about 10 to one. I can count and prove so if you like.

Rather, you are only interested in your file cabinet of 'errors.' Yeah, not really worth my, or frankly, your time. It is a house of cards as I've said. Once the Apostle Paul 'doesn't agree with Jesus' those scripture are suddenly 'fallible' too then we get to pick-n-choose our theology and it is no longer "Christian" but something catered to our personal whims and ideas. We become our own gods, or you can be god to a few that will follow you along. What is to discuss after that? :think:



Where's my 'blue in the face' icon? I've answered this three ways on Sunday. I COULD enumerate them but in three posts you are going to say you asked a simple question and I didn't answer again, kind of like you lambasted Daqq for saying 'dismissed' yet dismissing everything I've said out of hand. That's not dialogue. That's opinionated asserting itself. I've a God. I don't need another. I understand scripture just fine. I saw AND answered this question about Jairus long ago. I don't 'want' to answer it again for the umpteenth time. Titus 3:10 'seems' to me to apply :think: My answers given in thread apply to EVERY one of your 'errors.'
1) Yes I see a 'difference.'
2) No, I fundamentally disagree that difference automatically equates error. That's an assumption and a hasty one.
3) We are NOT supposed to be reading scripture for errors, they are authoritative and all a growing Christian needs for life and Godliness 2 Timothy 3:16
4) Psalm 19 and Deuteronomy 6 are talking about scriptures and they are esteemed by David, Moses, all the men of God and God Himself and FURTHER, He COMMANDS that they should be :noway:
5) Even 'if' it looked exactly like an error and I don't believe that necessary, there is NO WAY you are capable of chasing it down and NOT YOUR BUSINESS. If the Lord ever appoints you, He will surely let me know. That hasn't happened.
6) Lost in details and avoiding 'foolish controversy and genealogy. I have no problem answering honest inquiry. I have every problem posturing 'Christian/NotChristian" Or "Spirit-filled/Carnal Christian" with you or anybody else over the matter. Leaving before it is an ugly fight? Yeah, not going to be a part of that, regardless of how purposeful or inept you starting it winds up being. Nothing good will come of this. I'm no prophet, but mark my words. It will cause even some of us, to no longer fellowship across with Charismatics that are already here. Our 'ignore lists' will grow.

7) Anything I say to you, including this very post, will be used for fodder, poor-assessment, and example that is used to make yourself look 'AWESOME!" because that is what a lot of Charismatics do and then somehow try to 'claim' the moral high ground (has to, its a charismatic hallmark). We likely have the same sorts of disdains regarding such polarization. I'm sure we've our own patterns.

So, in a nutshell: I TRULY believe ONLY God can break down these walls. They are stark, high, thick, and between us? Insurmountable. We are so far removed from one another, I believe only in Christ will there be reconciliation and not until glory 1 John 3:2

Two things:
1) No, you haven’t answered about Jairus. I pointed out three specific errors and you will not address them. Your not-an-answer is “you’re not suppose to look or question.” Don’t pretend that is an answer.
2) As for “Untrue. Read back a few posts. I out-quote you scripture about 10 to one. I can count and prove so if you like...” I don’t insert irrelevant passages as an avoidance technique. I am sure you know that doing that as you do is not a virtue.

Specifically:
1) Did Jairus initially ask Jesus to heal a sick girl or to raise a dead girl?
2) Did Jairus learn his daughter was dead before Jesus started to his house or afterwards?

You cannot answer because doing so would prove your man-made doctrine of inerrancy is false. So you say we aren’t supposed to look. You have a doctrine based on pretending.

 

[2003cobra]

I would eat my non-existent hat if you, Glorydaz knew what "other Gospel" Paul was talking about in Gal 1:9. If you did, then you would know what sort of an issue comprised an "other Gospel".

In fact, consider that an invitation to all, to tell us what specific "other gospel" that was.

And just because folks disagree with the Gospel according to Glorydaz, does not mean they disagree with THE Gospel, and that we should treat them as enemies.

There is not one person on this forum who agrees with one other person on this forum on every single point of doctrine. And if they did, they would belong to a cult, doctrines are spoon-fed and they are brainwashed.

Well said.

 

[2003cobra]

No doubt you are a hypocrite when it comes to how your mind auto-interprets what you read.
For no doubt you tell yourself that you observe some form of the well known saying:

"If the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense, lest you end up with nonsense."

And yet there are many places where you do not do what you tell yourself you do. When you find a text that you do not wish to take for what you consider the plain sense your mind automatically converts it into some mystical spiritual sense: but since you have no spiritual sense, you ignore the passage and move on, having found no answer for what the passage truly intends. You make such decisions on a daily basis without even realizing what you are doing because your mind does it automatically for you without you even needing to think about it.

If you aren’t going to spiritualize the text into something unrecognizable:

Specifically:
1) Did Jairus initially ask Jesus to heal a sick girl or to raise a dead girl?
2) Did Jairus learn his daughter was dead before Jesus started to his house or afterwards?


Answer clearly and prove me wrong about your intentions.

 

[daqq]

If you aren’t going to spiritualize the text into something unrecognizable:

Specifically:
1) Did Jairus initially ask Jesus to heal a sick girl or to raise a dead girl?
2) Did Jairus learn his daughter was dead before Jesus started to his house or afterwards?


Answer clearly and prove me wrong about your intentions.

I already answered you and, whether or not you will admit it, you know that I did. Now therefore, following up on what I posted to you, which you have just quoted and responded to, it is your turn to answer. Where in the following passage do we read anything about a parable, or a proverb, or an allegory, or any such thing? And if not then please answer as to whether or not you view this passage according to "the plain sense", which is extremely plain and speaks in plain physical terms, or whether you yourself choose to spiritualize it away into meaningless nothingness, unless of course you have a detailed explanation for your spiritualization of the passage and what that all entails:

Matthew 5:2730 HNV
27 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery;'
28 but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it away from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehinnom.
30 If your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off, and throw it away from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehinnom.

Are these statements literally physical in meaning according to "the plain sense" in your opinion? or do you automatically assume they are parables and allegories when you read them? Do you take them as you claim to do in the rest of your doctrine and understanding of the scriptures? or are you a hypocrite who spiritualizes the above words into meaningless nothingness and moves on while ignoring them and thus voiding them out from your doctrine? And if you do not ignore the above words then please do tell me what they mean in your spiritual interpretation of them: for if you do not spiritualize the above passage you are still a hypocrite, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of Elohim. And therefore you should not be having a right eye or a right hand because, no doubt, if you were true to your word, you would have plucked out your eye, and cut off your hand, and would have cast them away from you by now: well before you ever arrived here to tell us all how wrong we are for believing the scripture and especially the Testimony of Messiah in the Gospel accounts, (which you did accuse concerning the Matthew 21 passage by saying those are not his words in Mat 21:2).

This is moreover the meaning of the saying, "Either make the tree good or make the tree evil", for every person is likened to a tree, and the tree is known by its fruit. In other words make your doctrine all the same, and do not allow your doctrine to ignore or pass by any of the Testimony of the Messiah: for when you do you stifle the Spirit of the Testimony of the Messiah and make void his teachings and words. If you ignore portions of what he says in your doctrine then you will not bear fruit, and the tree which bears no fruit is accursed like the fig tree which was cursed to wither away and die because it had no fruit: and it matters not what time of year it is, or season, or whether it is the time for figs or not, because the ultimate supernal teaching, (in any case, even if it be derived from a real historical event), pertains to people and not to literal trees.

Lukewarm is the same idiom or analogy from the Apocalypse, that is to say, the same as the tree bearing no fruit: and if you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, the Master says that he will spew you out of his mouth. Either make the tree good or make the tree evil: no fence sitting, make a commitment one way or the other, for the good can be commended and the bad can be corrected or "pruned", (cut off), but the fence sitter, and the snake-like sidewinder always weaving his way between the two different ways, that one is both lukewarm and like a fig tree with no fruit whatsoever on it, for ignoring portions of the Testimony which the reader and hearer refuses to consume and assimilate into his or her doctrine.

You are cherry picking and choosing how you will understand what you wish to accept into your doctrine and what you will dismiss and spiritualize away into meaningless nothingness, so you can ignore it and move along with yourself and your own privately held mindset, all the while in some cases not even realizing what you are doing. Moreover here you are making accusations and judgments against the scripture when you yourself do not understand it when you read it, and the above is no doubt a good example; unless of course you can provide us all with your spiritual interpretation of what it means, (which you can indeed know if you know the Testimony of the Master). However if you have no spiritual interpretation of the above passage, and yet you do not do what it says according to your normal "plain sense" understanding of the scriptures, then you are a hypocrite of hypocrites and the same goes for Zenn.

 

[daqq]

Answer clearly and prove me wrong about your intentions.

I already answered you and, whether or not you will admit it, you know that I did. Now therefore, following up on what I posted to you, which you have just quoted and responded to, it is your turn to answer. Where in the following passage do we read anything about a parable, or a proverb, or an allegory, or any such thing? And if not then please answer as to whether or not you view this passage according to "the plain sense", which is extremely plain and speaks in plain physical terms, or whether you yourself choose to spiritualize it away into meaningless nothingness, unless of course you have a detailed explanation for your spiritualization of the passage and what that all entails:

Matthew 5:2730 HNV
27 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery;'
28 but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it away from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehinnom.
30 If your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off, and throw it away from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehinnom.

Are these statements literally physical in meaning according to "the plain sense" in your opinion? or do you automatically assume they are parables and allegories when you read them? Do you take them as you claim to do in the rest of your doctrine and understanding of the scriptures? or are you a hypocrite who spiritualizes the above words into meaningless nothingness and moves on while ignoring them and thus voiding them out from your doctrine? And if you do not ignore the above words then please do tell me what they mean in your spiritual interpretation of them: for if you do not spiritualize the above passage you are still a hypocrite, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of Elohim. And therefore you should not be having a right eye or a right hand because, no doubt, if you were true to your word, you would have plucked out your eye, and cut off your hand, and would have cast them away from you by now: well before you ever arrived here to tell us all how wrong we are for believing the scripture and especially the Testimony of Messiah in the Gospel accounts, (which you did accuse concerning the Matthew 21 passage by saying those are not his words in Mat 21:2).

This is moreover the meaning of the saying, "Either make the tree good or make the tree evil", for every person is likened to a tree, and the tree is known by its fruit. In other words make your doctrine all the same, and do not allow your doctrine to ignore or pass by any of the Testimony of the Messiah: for when you do you stifle the Spirit of the Testimony of the Messiah and make void his teachings and words. If you ignore portions of what he says in your doctrine then you will not bear fruit, and the tree which bears no fruit is accursed like the fig tree which was cursed to wither away and die because it had no fruit: and it matters not what time of year it is, or season, or whether it is the time for figs or not, because the ultimate supernal teaching, (in any case, even if it be derived from a real historical event), pertains to people and not to literal trees.

Lukewarm is the same idiom or analogy from the Apocalypse, that is to say, the same as the tree bearing no fruit: and if you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, the Master says that he will spew you out of his mouth. Either make the tree good or make the tree evil: no fence sitting, make a commitment one way or the other, for the good can be commended and the bad can be corrected or "pruned", (cut off), but the fence sitter, and the snake-like sidewinder always weaving his way between the two different ways, that one is both lukewarm and like a fig tree with no fruit whatsoever on it, for ignoring portions of the Testimony which the reader and hearer refuses to consume and assimilate into his or her doctrine.

You are cherry picking and choosing how you will understand what you wish to accept into your doctrine and what you will dismiss and spiritualize away into meaningless nothingness, so you can ignore it and move along with yourself and you own privately held mindset, all the while in some cases not even realizing what you are doing. Moreover here you are making accusations and judgments against the scripture when you yourself do not understand it when you read it, and the above is no doubt a good example; unless of course you can provide us all with your spiritual interpretation of what it means, (which you can indeed know if you know the Testimony of the Master). However if you have no spiritual interpretation of the above passage, and yet you do not do what it says according to your normal "plain sense" understanding of the scriptures, then you are a hypocrite of hypocrites and the same goes for Zenn.

And here is the next one for you; since I have answered you so many times and you never seem to return the favor. After you have answered the above clearly and intelligibly, answer the following also, and prove me wrong about your intentions.

Is the Master subverting or abolishing the commandment to honor your father and mother in the following passage? (Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16), or is it yet another passage that you spiritualize into meaningless nothingness and essentially ignore in your doctrine? for if you do not spiritualize it then you must therefore believe that he is abolishing one of the ten commandments:

Luke 14:25-27 ASV
25 Now there went with him great multitudes: and he turned, and said unto them,
26 If any man cometh unto me, and hateth not his own father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
27 Whosoever doth not bear his own cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

But if you do spiritualize it then lay out your spiritual understanding of this statement because, if not, you are a hypocrite of hypocrites who does not really even believe the Testimony of the Master. If you have no answer either way then you are nothing more than a pretender who is cherry picking what you will see as the plain sense reading and what you will spiritualize into meaningless nothingness so that you can ignore it and go along your merry own way. The plain sense in the above passage is, yet again, very plain and simple to understand; but if you choose wrong for your own benefit you make the Master into a lawless Torah violator by way of your errant doctrine and mindset. Which one is it? Honor your father and mother or hate them so you can take up your own stake and be a disciple of the Master? or is it supernal in meaning so that you can maintain the commandment? and if so then lay out your spiritual understanding of the meaning of this text. And, again, the same goes for Zenn.

 

[glorydaz]

Cannot or will not, they are one and the same to me.

Ah, the inability to discern between those two is a sad thing.

Paul might have gone a little ape now and then when there truly was "another Gospel" being preached.
But he was not like Planet of the Apes all the time.
K:K:K:K:K:K:K:K:K:K:

You're the one who made that blunder....not me. :chuckle:

 

[glorydaz]

This is Sonnet's MO. It's exactly what he did to me in his Gospel thread. The same exact thing over and over again, and as many times as I would answer and explain, he'd ask again as if I hadn't answered at all. Including telling others I was unable to answer.

If it walks like a duck..... :readthis:

And another thing Glorydaz, in #2169 you accuse Sonnet of stonewalling.

Yet when I ask you what that "other Gospel" was which Paul was speaking of in Gal 1:9, you stonewall me with this reply ...


Likewise when I ask you the difference between a glorified Christian's body and that of an angel, it goes strangely silent your end. Is it because you cannot, or will not answer that question too?

Are you seriously that dense? :think:

No, Sonnet asked, and I answered. He asked again, and I answered. He asked again, and I answered. I learned a lesson, do not cast your pearls before the swine. They'll just keep grunting.

 

[Zenn]

I know what love is, but I don't have to love you enemies of the Gospel. Where does it say I have to?

:AMR:

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
(Mat 5:44 KJV)

But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
(Luk 6:27 KJV)

But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
(Luk 6:35-36 KJV)

Zenn

PS: It ain't really hard to read.

 

[glorydaz]

:AMR:

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
(Mat 5:44 KJV)

But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
(Luk 6:27 KJV)

But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
(Luk 6:35-36 KJV)

Zenn

PS: It ain't really hard to read.

Oh, the law is very easy to read. But it will not give life.

 

[Zenn]

Honor your father and mother or hate them so you can take up your own stake and be a disciple of the Master? or is it supernal in meaning so that you can maintain the commandment? and if so then lay out your spiritual understanding of the meaning of this text. And, again, the same goes for Zenn.

But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
(Mat 12:48-49 KJV)

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
(Joh 1:17 KJV)

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
(Heb 8:13 KJV)

POOF

 

[Zenn]

Oh, the law is very easy to read. But it will not give life.

So... YOU say the words of Jesus are law and will not give life.

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. (Joh 6:63 KJV)

If nothing else gldz, it is very clear to see that you have rejected the very words of Jesus.

Zenn



void

 

[Zeke]

Is that an ignorant statement? :think: I think it is. It is not a 'drawn' conclusion, just a wives' tale. That means you've been a bit dense, no?

Does that hurt horribly? Should I say it in a way that doesn't hurt your feelings? Look, I've been through 'public' education, I get what people think that passes for 'gentle, kind, and polite.' I'm generally exceptionally polite to you, despite you not showing it back. You started with this mean and snarky before I even knew you were full of angst and angry. I STILL do not believe I've earned it. Does 'taking it' from you count? :think:

If it wasn't a conscience thorn hiding amongst the thistles then take no thought about it or pull it out . You're the one with a god who takes offense and sends the so called lost to eternal punishment for that scale of just us is a god of tradition crammed down you're throat maybe it's time to throw up.

 

[glorydaz]

So... YOU say the words of Jesus are law and will not give life.

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. (Joh 6:63 KJV)

If nothing else gldz, it is very clear to see that you have rejected the very words of Jesus.

Zenn



void

God forbid, as Paul would say, I'm telling you the law He preached when He walked among us does not give life.

Galatians 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.​

What He did was preach what leads to LIFE, and that IS the purpose of the Law, and it's WHY He preached it. Do you think you can keep it? If so, you have not yet understood the purpose of what the Lord was saying in those verses you quote.

Romans 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.​

Rather than look to what you must do to have life with your own obedience or commandment keeping, you need to look to what the Risen and Ascended Lord revealed to Paul.

 

[daqq]

But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
(Mat 12:48-49 KJV)

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
(Joh 1:17 KJV)

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
(Heb 8:13 KJV)

POOF

So you say that the Master abolished the commandment to honor your father and mother, and just as I said, you do so for your own benefit, and you apparently either have no clue or do not care about the other places where he upholds that very commandment. You thus make your own contradictions in not only the scripture but the very words of the Master whom you claim to follow and believe in. How can you say you "believe" in him when you do not care to uphold his Testimony and do not care when you force contradictions in his Testimony for your own benefit to satisfy your privately held doctrines?

Matthew 15:3-8 ASV
3 And he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?
4 For God said, Honor thy father and thy mother: and, He that speaketh evil of father or mother, let him die the death.
5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, That wherewith thou mightest have been profited by me is given to God;
6 he shall not honor his father. And ye have made void the word of God because of your tradition.
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,
8 This people honoreth me with their lips; But their heart is far from me.

Indeed, a hypocrite of hypocrites you are:

Matthew 19:16-21 ASV
16 And behold, one came to him and said, Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why askest thou me concerning that which is good? One there is who is good: but if thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? And Jesus said, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I observed: what lack I yet?
21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wouldest be perfect, go, sell that which thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

Moreover you entirely missed the supernal application: Jerusalem of above is the mother(covenant) of us all, (Gal 4:24,26), and of course there is "your father the Devil" and "your heavenly Father" who are obviously at odds and enmity, (just as Jerusalem of below which is allegorically and spiritually called Sodom and Hagar-Egypt, Rev 11:8, is at odds and enmity against Jerusalem of above).

John 5:21-23 ASV
21 For as the Father raiseth the dead and giveth them life, even so the Son also giveth life to whom he will.
22 For neither doth the Father judge any man, but he hath given all judgment unto the Son;
23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father that sent him.

Moreover you entirely missed the fact that Paul repeats the commandment to the Ephesians: do you not believe that the teachings of Paul belong to the New Covenant? Oh yeah, that's right, you have, shall we say, a "distaste" for Paul too! :chuckle:

Ephesians 6:1-3 ASV
1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
2 Honor thy father and mother (which is the first commandment with promise),
3 that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

Yes, according to *you* the scripture has errors, but you fail to realize the reason why that is the way it is: the fault is not with the scripture but with your own perception of the scripture because you do not have the Logos-Reasoning of the Testimony of the Messiah found in the Gospel accounts. The fault is all your own for cherry picking what you like and ignoring what you do not wish to accept into your privately held doctrines. If you are not careful the only thing going POOF might be you, (I would not be calling down anymore lightning if I were you, but that's just me, lol).

POOF

 

[Zeke]

So... YOU say the words of Jesus are law and will not give life.

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. (Joh 6:63 KJV)

If nothing else gldz, it is very clear to see that you have rejected the very words of Jesus.

Zenn



void

Wrong division syndrome, from the right dividers who miss the demarcation line is just 2Cor 3:6.

 

[glorydaz]

Wrong division syndrome, from the right dividers who miss the demarcation line is just 2Cor 3:6.

Just admit your error, and stop making excuses.

 

[daqq]

I truly hope you understand the whole point, Zenn, (and Cobra), which point is that by an ordinary "plain sense" understanding of the passage I quoted, Luke 14:26, you nullified, voided out, made of no effect, and forced contradictions and errors in many scripture passages.

And here is the next one for you; since I have answered you so many times and you never seem to return the favor. After you have answered the above clearly and intelligibly, answer the following also, and prove me wrong about your intentions.

Is the Master subverting or abolishing the commandment to honor your father and mother in the following passage? (Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16), or is it yet another passage that you spiritualize into meaningless nothingness and essentially ignore in your doctrine? for if you do not spiritualize it then you must therefore believe that he is abolishing one of the ten commandments:

Luke 14:25-27 ASV
25 Now there went with him great multitudes: and he turned, and said unto them,
26 If any man cometh unto me, and hateth not his own father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
27 Whosoever doth not bear his own cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

But if you do spiritualize it then lay out your spiritual understanding of this statement because, if not, you are a hypocrite of hypocrites who does not really even believe the Testimony of the Master. If you have no answer either way then you are nothing more than a pretender who is cherry picking what you will see as the plain sense reading and what you will spiritualize into meaningless nothingness so that you can ignore it and go along your merry own way. The plain sense in the above passage is, yet again, very plain and simple to understand; but if you choose wrong for your own benefit you make the Master into a lawless Torah violator by way of your errant doctrine and mindset. Which one is it? Honor your father and mother or hate them so you can take up your own stake and be a disciple of the Master? or is it supernal in meaning so that you can maintain the commandment? and if so then lay out your spiritual understanding of the meaning of this text. And, again, the same goes for Zenn.

But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
(Mat 12:48-49 KJV)

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
(Joh 1:17 KJV)

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
(Heb 8:13 KJV)

POOF

So you say that the Master abolished the commandment to honor your father and mother, and just as I said, you do so for your own benefit, and you apparently either have no clue or do not care about the other places where he upholds that very commandment. You thus make your own contradictions in not only the scripture but the very words of the Master whom you claim to follow and believe in. How can you say you "believe" in him when you do not care to uphold his Testimony and do not care when you force contradictions in his Testimony for your own benefit to satisfy your privately held doctrines?

Matthew 15:3-8 ASV
3 And he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?
4 For God said, Honor thy father and thy mother: and, He that speaketh evil of father or mother, let him die the death.
5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, That wherewith thou mightest have been profited by me is given to God;
6 he shall not honor his father. And ye have made void the word of God because of your tradition.
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,
8 This people honoreth me with their lips; But their heart is far from me.

Indeed, a hypocrite of hypocrites you are:

Matthew 19:16-21 ASV
16 And behold, one came to him and said, Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why askest thou me concerning that which is good? One there is who is good: but if thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? And Jesus said, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I observed: what lack I yet?
21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wouldest be perfect, go, sell that which thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

Moreover you entirely missed the supernal application: Jerusalem of above is the mother(covenant) of us all, (Gal 4:24,26), and of course there is "your father the Devil" and "your heavenly Father" who are obviously at odds and enmity, (just as Jerusalem of below which is allegorically and spiritually called Sodom and Hagar-Egypt, Rev 11:8, is at odds and enmity against Jerusalem of above).

John 5:21-23 ASV
21 For as the Father raiseth the dead and giveth them life, even so the Son also giveth life to whom he will.
22 For neither doth the Father judge any man, but he hath given all judgment unto the Son;
23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father that sent him.

Moreover you entirely missed the fact that Paul repeats the commandment to the Ephesians: do you not believe that the teachings of Paul belong to the New Covenant? Oh yeah, that's right, you have, shall we say, a "distaste" for Paul too! :chuckle:

Ephesians 6:1-3 ASV
1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
2 Honor thy father and mother (which is the first commandment with promise),
3 that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

Yes, according to *you* the scripture has errors, but you fail to realize the reason why that is the way it is: the fault is not with the scripture but with your own perception of the scripture because you do not have the Logos-Reasoning of the Testimony of the Messiah found in the Gospel accounts. The fault is all your own for cherry picking what you like and ignoring what you do not wish to accept into your privately held doctrines. If you are not careful the only thing going POOF might be you, (I would not be calling down anymore lightning if I were you, but that's just me, lol).

POOF