A message for Jeremiah

[HaShev]

See Irish Ram, you are proving the problem with Christian contradicting teachings about Death.
You are teaching a heaven in death where stroking the ego of your gatekeeper gets you in which is not the same as the Judaic teaching of Olam Habah=world to come whereby you resurrect back into life perfected to see the value and result of your deeds.
Once again look at the iconograph of Lucifer holding down the scales that weigh your deeds, what do you see?
The same thing you are teaching, that deeds don't matter that The fallen false prophet can cheat your judgement.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, vey.

 

[RandomVariable]

The Irish ram,
but the lamb on passover was not for sin it was to mock the Egyptian idol lamb god and make the Egyptians kick them out of Egypt. The Lamb=idolization/sin itself
By calling Jesus that lamb you admit he is the idol god and sin needing removal.

The lamb was for supper. God was just making sure no one headed off on an empty stomach. Wow, you people really over-think some of this stuff.

In my reading I found two verses which make your statement, HaShev, half right and my statement a truth, which I knew all along.

Jeremiah 7:

22For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
​

Exodus 8:

26And Moses said, It is not meet so to do; for we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians to the LORD our God: lo, shall we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and will they not stone us?​

(edit: I just thought; Does it specify a lamb anywhere?)

​

So as I read this the lamb of passover was not a sacrifice but the use of a lamb was in part to goad the Egyptians. There might be other parts of the Bible which elaborate on this. I am just throwing this out since I happened to come across it.

 

[HaShev]

Yeah and when you think about it, the maggis who Rome lifted high in the converged image called Jesus had learned his forbidden ideology and sorcery tricks when he fled towards Egypt, and the mythological figures they used for his mystical & deifying image where Egyptian mythologies like Horus and Osiris.
So basically this image is the Egyptian abominations.
If you think about the world problems through the ages mainly stems from those underworld teachings that teach death as reward.

 

[guno]

Or you can get off the government teat and actually work to EARN your living.

You mean preachers?

Christer preachers are parasites living off their low IQ followers

What is the function that a clergyman performs in the world? Answer: he gets his living by assuring idiots that he can save them from an imaginary hell.
— H L Mencken

Of learned men, the clergy show the lowest development of professional ethics. Any pastor is free to cadge customers from the divines of rival sects, and to denounce the divines themselves as theological quacks.
— H L Mencken

Deep within the heart of every evangelist lies the wreck of a car salesman.
— H L Mencken



Moral certainty is always a sign of cultural inferiority. The more uncivilized the man, the surer he is that he knows precisely what is right and what is wrong. All human progress, even in morals, has been the work of men who have doubted the current moral values, not of men who have whooped them up and tried to enforce them. The truly civilized man is always skeptical and tolerant.
— H L Mencken, Minority Report (1956),

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Excuse me, Guno, but what has this to do with the OP? Jake asked a question, I answered it and it's time to make a new thread now - isn't it? Yeesh!

 

[Dot Com]

Personally? i think jerri is going to need A LOT of sunscreen where she's going

 

[guno]

Excuse me, Guno, but what has this to do with the OP? Jake asked a question, I answered it and it's time to make a new thread now - isn't it? Yeesh!

I was replying to moon glows post, try to keep up

 

[BluePhantom]

I think it's important and worthwhile to counter fear and superstion with reason and rationality.

Ok then why do you try to do it?

How do we discern the truth? By partisan faith in supernatural gawds? By unsupportable assertion and stepping away and accepting untested and anecdotal claims? Or, do we assiduously test our truths, hold them up to scrutiny, demand they be accountable at some level?

ok but you don't test anyone's truths. You merely proclaim your truth for anyone who is willing to hear. Whether you intend it or not, most of your stuff comes off as abrasive and intolerant. No one is going to listen to what you have to say if you show initial disrespect for their current belief system. Thus, you are testing no one because no one bothers to listen to you.

 

[BluePhantom]

Just curious, Jake. I noticed you chose a translation that uses "charity" instead of "love". I am assuming you used the KJV as that is how it translates it as well. The Greek word for charity is filanthro̱pía, but according to the Greek interlinear (see link below) the root words used is agápi̱, which is "love".

Now as we both know, different manuscripts from antiquity say different things and words used for translation in the Elizabethan Age sometimes do not mean the same thing as today. In other words, when the KJV was translated in the Elizabethan Age, it was a faithful translation because "charity" and "love" were used interchangeably when referring to love as a noun. Today they have very different definitions though.

I wonder if you would comment on continuing to use the Elizabethan translation "charity" instead of "love" in 1 Corinthians 13. What are your thoughts on how it may apply to modern understanding of the scripture?

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/1co13.pdf

At the very basic level, charity and love can be equated as nearly the same. Of course, they aren't at the essential element but are close. I love the KJV from days attending church with my grandmother. I learned Spanish by reading Santa Biblia and Don Quioxte along side the English versions. Finally, I love the beauty and linguistic elegance of the KJV. When I read KJV, I always have a NIV and a Catholic reader's Bible alongside.

Conceptually, I would agree. I also think the KJV is gorgeous in regard to how it is written. But what I mean is that we live in an age where some people take things very literally according to modern English. As I have posted in other threads, I know people who truly believe that the part in the Lord's Prayer about "...forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us..." is talking about walking onto someone's property without permission. So when the word charity is used instead of love, don't you think that can confuse the message?

The context of 1 Corinthians 13 is in reference to spiritual gifts (prophecy, speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues, etc). The Corinthians were apparently squabbling about their gifts and suggesting that their gift was better than other people's gift, and speaking over each other in tongues, etc. It was a mess. They were not using their gifts in a loving way. They were using them to make themselves appear better than others. Paul writes 1 Corinthians 13 to point out that if you do not use these gifts lovingly they are worthless.

So I get a little concerned sometimes, that when one reads the KJV people can mistake the message due to it's beautiful but outdated language. Like those who interpret the Lord's Prayer as talking about walking on someone else's grass, some might take 1 Cor. 13 to mean 'we can do whatever we want with our gifts so long as we give the guy on the street corner our spare change every now and then'.

See what I am getting at?

 

[HaShev]

Personally? i think jerri is going to need A LOT of sunscreen where she's going

Only because they worship the sun.
But seriously they don't go to hell, they create hell in their ideology. Instead of creating the Olam Habah and Tikkun Olam they create that trash heap of existance outside the walls of the kingdom that is possible. They don't understand non linear time whereby the kingdom has to be created, it just doesn't magically exist for nothing, it only seemingly existed from begining to end because they don't understand how the end can be at the beginning=non linear time.
If it always existed then you would not need the Bible who's path leads you there, nor mediators, nor messengers, nor prophets.
The fact they don't know this proves their prophets and teachers failed them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Just curious, Jake. I noticed you chose a translation that uses "charity" instead of "love". I am assuming you used the KJV as that is how it translates it as well. The Greek word for charity is filanthro̱pía, but according to the Greek interlinear (see link below) the root words used is agápi̱, which is "love".

Now as we both know, different manuscripts from antiquity say different things and words used for translation in the Elizabethan Age sometimes do not mean the same thing as today. In other words, when the KJV was translated in the Elizabethan Age, it was a faithful translation because "charity" and "love" were used interchangeably when referring to love as a noun. Today they have very different definitions though.

I wonder if you would comment on continuing to use the Elizabethan translation "charity" instead of "love" in 1 Corinthians 13. What are your thoughts on how it may apply to modern understanding of the scripture?

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/1co13.pdf

At the very basic level, charity and love can be equated as nearly the same. Of course, they aren't at the essential element but are close. I love the KJV from days attending church with my grandmother. I learned Spanish by reading Santa Biblia and Don Quioxte along side the English versions. Finally, I love the beauty and linguistic elegance of the KJV. When I read KJV, I always have a NIV and a Catholic reader's Bible alongside.

Conceptually, I would agree. I also think the KJV is gorgeous in regard to how it is written. But what I mean is that we live in an age where some people take things very literally according to modern English. As I have posted in other threads, I know people who truly believe that the part in the Lord's Prayer about "...forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us..." is talking about walking onto someone's property without permission. So when the word charity is used instead of love, don't you think that can confuse the message?

The context of 1 Corinthians 13 is in reference to spiritual gifts (prophecy, speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues, etc). The Corinthians were apparently squabbling about their gifts and suggesting that their gift was better than other people's gift, and speaking over each other in tongues, etc. It was a mess. They were not using their gifts in a loving way. They were using them to make themselves appear better than others. Paul writes 1 Corinthians 13 to point out that if you do not use these gifts lovingly they are worthless.

So I get a little concerned sometimes, that when one reads the KJV people can mistake the message due to it's beautiful but outdated language. Like those who interpret the Lord's Prayer as talking about walking on someone else's grass, some might take 1 Cor. 13 to mean 'we can do whatever we want with our gifts so long as we give the guy on the street corner our spare change every now and then'.

See what I am getting at?

Sure, and I would say such as you describe are biblically illiterate anyway (the equivalent of those who could not have access to the Bible before the 16th century). In this case, these jokers have sinned a great sin. They have the opportunity to study carefully, yet either let someone else tell them what it means, or they interpret it the way they want anyway so they can attain power or position or money or any or all three.

The pastor's duty is to explain contradictions and difficulties in scripture to make sure the illiterate are such because they so choose not because they have no choice.

 

[JakeStarkey]

HaShev, it means you have willfully failed to learn from the prophets and teachers. A shame.

 

[HaShev]

Jake then you contradict the bible and prove my points.
One day you might actually use refutation with actual backing and substance like say the Bible, not the self testified one, but the actual Tanakh.

 

[JakeStarkey]

HaShev, telling you directly that you have failed to learn from the prophets and teachers means that you have not refuted anything, but only inserted your willful opinions, unsupported by your analysis.

The willful, such as you, will do as you desire until that day comes.

 

[theword]

Jeri, read, pray, ponder, and wait for a day before replying.

1 Corinthians Chapter 13
1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

2 And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4 Charity suffereth long, [and] is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

8 Charity never faileth: but whether [there be] prophecies, they shall fail; whether [there be] tongues, they shall cease; whether [there be] knowledge, it shall vanish away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these [is] charity.

Rome's Vatican sure pushed this idea after they had all those saints killed for speaking against the forced tithing laws of the religious Jews.

 

[Dot Com]

jerri better change her ways or she's headed for the down escalator. FACT!!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

You still can't defend the absurdity of your posts, HaShev.

And the nothings and natterings of HaShev continue.

Always have been, always will be.

Until the end. His spamming proves that.

p.s. HaShev's absurdities are not evidence that need to be refuted. They fail by ad absurdum. No need exists to address them one by one.

 

[HaShev]

See I just proved that Christians are willing to sin/lie just to bump their own threads( human ego) and because they are agreeing with lying and abuse that proves the commentary on affiliation pride.
Therefore we can once again conclude that Jesus makes you the sinner and is not the saving you from these traits.
Create the giant ego and you become the problematic ego=affiliation pride.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nope, you silly mouse, you conclude so; no one with brains or a spiritual balance concludes so.