Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

[Zeke]

Good segway with hoofs back into Jesus riding carnal donkeys into the city of Jerusalem, Never happened literally but with a enumerable supply of beasts of burden all over the globe He can ride them till they ride with him, Hee Haw.

 

[Zeke]

: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.

All those good things Paul recommended to think on for obvious reasons of the higher law, was pre Mid Acting class.

 

[Lon]

I have thoroughly read Galatians many times, and I'm quite aware of what the "other gospel" is.

What? You think I'm supposed to bark when you clap your hands?

Kinda funny.

Oh, I see. Paul was gentle.....but he may have gone ape. Aren't you the clever one?

Spit-take worthy.

I gave the Gospel as an example of how and why we have enemies. We also have enemies who attack the word of God, and they, too, warrant going "ape" over. This thread... duh.

]You should be careful when you pick your battles. The scope may be broader than the little parameters you insist on. My enemies are those who are enemies of God's word....be they those who preach a false gospel of works or those who attack the Holy Scriptures. In fact, those are God's enemies more than mine. I just happen to be a member of His Army. lain:

Yeah, once you question if Jesus is God, say Paul was opposed to the Lord Jesus Christ, and pronounce yourself God's appointed apostle, there isn't much kid-gloves are going to accomplish. That said, my wife said I 'could' say it nicer and then directed me to "say it nice." Gonna be a lot of work! I did ask if you say to someone who is dense "You're dense," do they get it? :think:

 

[Lon]

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?

Well, Paul says, in Galations "is no 'other' gospel at all!" So isn't it really the apostle that is stonewalling? :think:

Seriously though, one of these said Paul was anti-Christ (in so many words). Another? Doesn't know if Jesus is God. It is never as simple as whether there was one or two donkeys.

 

[glorydaz]

Kinda funny.



Spit-take worthy.



Yeah, once you question if Jesus is God, say Paul was opposed to the Lord Jesus Christ, and pronounce yourself God's appointed apostle, there isn't much kid-gloves are going to accomplish. That said, my wife said I 'could' say it nicer and then directed me to "say it nice." Gonna be a lot of work! I did ask if you say to someone who is dense "You're dense," do they get it? :think:

I'm sure you have patience with those who have not heard....with those who want to hear....and with those who are truly seeking to know. These others are well-entrenched in their ungodly beliefs, and we are to resist them.

In other words...Don't try and be "nice" to a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. :chuckle:

 

[glorydaz]

Well, Paul says, in Galations "is no 'other' gospel at all!" So isn't it really the apostle that is stonewalling? :think:

Seriously though, one of these said Paul was anti-Christ (in so many words). Another? Doesn't know if Jesus is God. It is never as simple as whether there was one or two donkeys.

Isn't vowels the one that doesn't understand our resurrected body is not like that of an angel?

Does the seed of corn turn into an oak tree? :chuckle:

 

[Lon]

Good segway with hoofs back into Jesus riding carnal donkeys into the city of Jerusalem, Never happened literally but with a enumerable supply of beasts of burden all over the globe He can ride them till they ride with him, Hee Haw.

Er, YOU have rejected everything. There is nothing left to 'accept' after you are done with it, just you. I realize THAT is what you are offering: "Just be yourself, man..." :nono: YOUR lifestyle DICTATES your theology, Zeke. You KNOW it does!

It is simply this: Christianity - I needed Christ. I needed a Savior. You don't so you spiritualize Him away BECAUSE you don't want to know Him. It is as transparent and as simple as this, Zeke. Start from basics Romans 3:23 Or didn't the Apostle Paul exist either? :think:

Seriously, PLEASE think. "Excusing behavior" and "personal preference" are exactly that. THAT is the problem with the gurus you read. They are into 'me-ism.' :nono: As a reminder "I" (me) needed a Savior.

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.

You can go ahead and 'try' to do it without Him John 15:5 Colossians 1:17 AND the ACTUAL Jesus: 1 Corinthians 15:14 You are wasting your time and just becoming more embittered hanging around us. We all believe He exists. He has answered my prayers specifically. No amount of navel-gazing-supposed spiritualizing is going to take that away. :nono:

 

[2003cobra]

I asked:
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?


A real answer would be something like “Jairus asked Jesus to heal his sick daughter and only found out she was dead after they left for his house.”

Daqq spends six paragraphs evading the questions, when one sentence would have answered them.

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.

 

[Lon]

I'm sure you have patience with those who have not heard....with those who want to hear....and with those who are truly seeking to know. These others are well-entrenched in their ungodly beliefs, and we are to resist them.

In other words...Don't try and be "nice" to a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. :chuckle:

"Here kitty kitty kitty?" :idunno:

 

[2003cobra]

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.

You haven’t answered me.
I asked
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?

And you will not answer.

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.

Despite the fact that you will not answer my question, I will answer yours.

Jesus uses hyperbole often. His individual statements should not be taken in isolation and “prooftexted” into error.

Jesus said the passage you quoted, told us we were to love one another, and rebuked harshly the religious leaders who dedicated their goods to the Lord so they would not have to take care of their parents.

So, no, Jesus is not saying don’t take care of your parents. He is saying that following Jesus is our first responsibility, even if that means our entire family turns against us.

I took care of my parents. I took care of my wife’s parents. Did you?

There is a great difference between spiritualizing historical facts into nonsense and interpretation of the words of Jesus.

Your turn:
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?


A valid answer would be “Jairus asked Jesus to raise a dead girl and Jairus knew the daughter was dead before he spoke to Jesus and before they left together to go to the house of Jairus.”

Don’t pretend your many paragraphs of spiritualizing the text into nonsense is an answer.

 

[2003cobra]

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.

I have been driving all day, headed to Virginia to visit my eldest granddaughter. My answer to your question was written after I stopped for the night.

Pretending this passage eliminates the errors is delusional or deceptive.

Feel free to respond to my answer from a few minutes ago.

And then answer my questions:

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?

A valid answer will state whether or no Jairus knew his daughter was dead when he initially spoke to the Savior.

Any response that does not clearly state whether or not Jairus knew his daughter was dead before speaking to the Savior is no answer at all.

 

[Lon]

A valid answer will state whether or no Jairus knew his daughter was dead when he initially spoke to the Savior.

:nono: You don't get to stipulate what a valid answer is. THIS ONE 'assumes' there is no other option. :nono:

This is a huge part of those assessments of mine you don't like. I'll try it nicely: I can't seem to get this through to you, neither does anybody else trying to talk to you. "Valid" isn't a right that is exclusive to you. We could take a vote, but you'd lose on this.
Examples of questions 'yes or no' isn't an appropriate answer:

1) Do you still beat your wife?
2) Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?

"Trying" to answer with only 'yes or no' will create an untruth.

 

[iouae]

Well, Paul says, in Galations "is no 'other' gospel at all!" So isn't it really the apostle that is stonewalling? :think:

Seriously though, one of these said Paul was anti-Christ (in so many words). Another? Doesn't know if Jesus is God. It is never as simple as whether there was one or two donkeys.

Paul was saying that a false gospel is not a gospel because "gospel" means "good news" and what the false "gospel" was bringing was not good news.

 

[glorydaz]

I asked:
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?


A real answer would be something like “Jairus asked Jesus to heal his sick daughter and only found out she was dead after they left for his house.”

Daqq spends six paragraphs evading the questions, when one sentence would have answered them.

What? Are you disappointed that Daqq won't cast his pearls before the swine?

You know full well what you think of the pearls of wisdom that are found in God's word. You've spent an entire thread calling them fakes.

I've never known anyone more fitting of this verse than YOU.

Matthew 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.​

 

[2003cobra]

:nono: You don't get to stipulate what a valid answer is. THIS ONE 'assumes' there is no other option. :nono:

Once again you are wrong. I listed “a” valid answer, not the only valid answer.

Again, you are evading the question.

This is a huge part of those assessments of mine you don't like. I'll try it nicely: I can't seem to get this through to you, neither does anybody else trying to talk to you. "Valid" isn't a right that is exclusive to you. We could take a vote, but you'd lose on this.
Examples of questions 'yes or no' isn't an appropriate answer:

1) Do you still beat your wife?
2) Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?

"Trying" to answer with only 'yes or no' will create an untruth.

More evasion.

You will not answer a simple question about what the Bible says. Why?

Is it because you shut your eyes to errors in the text, and mislead others by telling them that they aren’t supposed to look closely enough at the Bible to see errors? Why not just adopt the Roman Catholic approach ubiquitous in the time of Martin Luther: only seminary graduates should read the Bible and others should just fall in line with what the educated say?

Again I ask:

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?

 

[glorydaz]

Paul was saying that a false gospel is not a gospel because "gospel" means "good news" and what the false "gospel" was bringing was not good news.

The Gospel of the Circumcision was for the Jews, who looked for a King to sit on David's Throne here on earth. But they crucified Him when He came.

Paul's Gospel was the Gospel of Salvation through which the Gentiles (and anyone) could be saved unto eternal life.

Paul was sent to preach the Gospel of Grace....that is the ONE Gospel that saves.

Perhaps you should read the entire chapter of Galatians. :think:

 

[Zeke]

Er, YOU have rejected everything. There is nothing left to 'accept' after you are done with it, just you. I realize THAT is what you are offering: "Just be yourself, man..." :nono: YOUR lifestyle DICTATES your theology, Zeke. You KNOW it does!

Let's be specific on what I AM rejecting! you have tried this approached before but it has little to do with what I actually believe about Jesus, and a triple shouting yes to my rejecting your religions bloody sacrifice having any merit past the first grade level of spiritual comprehension that only comes by and through revelation from Spirit, every one is in Christ and he will not deny himself because there is no condemnation for those who know that truth only? or does mans theology and definition of divine mercy and grace override God's judgement on the issue? I will save you the effort yes it does. but thankfully it doesn't

It is simply this: Christianity - I needed Christ. I needed a Savior. You don't so you spiritualize Him away BECAUSE you don't want to know Him. It is as transparent and as simple as this, Zeke. Start from basics Romans 3:23 Or didn't the Apostle Paul exist either? :think:

Heaven forbid I would leave tradition and commune with my Eternal Spiritual Father by and through Spirit instead of brick and mortar/dead letter mentality you prefer to have communion through, the image worship be it Paul or Jesus is all you can based you're base understanding of spiritual truth by, you still need the serpent on a pole to idolizes .

Seriously, PLEASE think. "Excusing behavior" and "personal preference" are exactly that. THAT is the problem with the gurus you read. They are into 'me-ism.' :nono: As a reminder "I" (me) needed a Savior.

You have nothing I want spiritually muchless give any thought to it any longer, Either we came from Spirit like are pattern Jesus or we are just an image like you foolishly degrade yourself and the rest of our Fathers off spring, that prison door constructed by the attitude of the prodigals brother is a perfect avatar for you, stuck in separatist thinking that voided the spiritual intent of the diversity in creations witness for all the body of Christ to learn from, you have walled off yourself with theology leaving you stuck in the mire eating and offering husk when truth comes in many packages, which is the only thing you need saved from, the doors open Lon and always has been, but you like the flesh off spring of Abraham have it all figured out, yet they were the least in spiritual understanding about the character of God, the same bloody mistake being made by you.

You can go ahead and 'try' to do it without Him John 15:5 Colossians 1:17 AND the ACTUAL Jesus: 1 Corinthians 15:14 You are wasting your time and just becoming more embittered hanging around us. We all believe He exists. He has answered my prayers specifically. No amount of navel-gazing-supposed spiritualizing is going to take that away. :nono:

[See you haven't a clue about Christ within man asleep or awake that seed in there, you still regulate him to some outward treasure you need to find outside in the imaginary kingdom with its door labeled christian, first you need to actually understand what being Christian means, leaving behind parabolic characters that are said to not be in Christ once you leave the first principles behind in the symbology they teach from, you have a degree all right in conditional trinkets offered for what is everyone's birthright by Spiritual Blood before the foundation of this world of imagery, sorry Lon you're fear trinkets aren't allowed if one wants to follow unconditional truth.

 

[2003cobra]

What? Are you disappointed that Daqq won't cast his pearls before the swine?

Daqq is certainly casting something, but not pearls.

And you are casting no answers.

Again I ask:

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?


Still no answers?

 

[iouae]

Isn't vowels the one that doesn't understand our resurrected body is not like that of an angel?

Does the seed of corn turn into an oak tree? :chuckle:

I said that God could have made us spirit bodies without the need for Christ to die, as God did with the angels.

Glorydaz insisted otherwise.

And to date she still cannot or will not explain. Either way, its the same. She has no answer, so that leaves her with one option - stonewall.

Likewise, she still cannot or will not tell us what the gospel in Gal 1:9 is. Either way, its the same. She has no answer, so that leaves her with one option - stonewall.

 

[glorydaz]

:nono: You don't get to stipulate what a valid answer is. THIS ONE 'assumes' there is no other option. :nono:

This is a huge part of those assessments of mine you don't like. I'll try it nicely: I can't seem to get this through to you, neither does anybody else trying to talk to you. "Valid" isn't a right that is exclusive to you. We could take a vote, but you'd lose on this.
Examples of questions 'yes or no' isn't an appropriate answer:

1) Do you still beat your wife?
2) Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?

"Trying" to answer with only 'yes or no' will create an untruth.

If there's one thing we've learned from this thread.....no one can give a correct answer to any of the texts this Sonnet has presented. He refuses to hear anything but his own doubting, unbelieving mind, and he is out to besmirch God's Holy enduring Word. They've been trying to do this very thing from the beginning. But, the Bible just keeps on leading men to the Lord...just as He intended it would.