Why Jesus Cried "My God, My God, Why Have You Forsaken Me"

[irosie91]

All I know is that 2000 years later Jews are still discussing Him.

who?

Who have you been discussing the last few posts?

2000 years later you are still discussing Jesus.

I am taking part in a messageboard that I access every day. I did not INTRODUCE
any particular individual. About whom would you like to converse?

So you are rationalizing why you are discussing Jesus 2000 years later? No one is holding a gun to your head. You are choosing to discuss Jesus.

you are being silly, ding-bat.----again. Who do you have in mind for
discussion? Saint ABU MAZEN?

I'm just making an observation. Apparently - given your comments - one that cause discomfort in you.

I am very comfortable. I told hubby that I need a LOW chair so that my short legs do not
dangle------and he GOT IT FOR ME. You want to talk to HIM? Every year I have to explain
what EASTER is all about-------unlike me, as a kid he never heard of some guy named "jesus"
so you can have a ONE-SIDED conversation with him. BUT he might refuse to talk about
Muhummad----even if that "object of conversation" interests you more. How about BEOWULF---
want to discuss BEOWULF?

I can tell you are very comfortable by the fact that you are still discussing Jesus 2000 years later.

I find it interesting that you quote one of David's Psalms----hubby would too---he reads
David INCESSANTLY and you still quote him-----3000 years later

The majority of Psalms were composed originally precisely for liturgical worship. They are songs of praise, in which a community is urged joyfully to sing out the praise of God and give thanks to God. Psalms can not be pigeon-holed into neat classifications. There are more Psalms of lament than of any other type. They may be individual (e.g., Ps 3–7; 22) or communal (e.g., Ps 44). Although they usually begin with a cry for help, they develop in various ways. The description of the distress is couched in the broad imagery typical of the Bible (one is in Sheol, the Pit, or is afflicted by enemies or wild beasts, etc.)—in such a way that one cannot pinpoint the exact nature of the psalmist’s plight. However, Ps 51 (cf. also Ps 130) seems to refer clearly to deliverance from sin. Several laments end on a note of certainty that the Lord has heard the prayer (cf. Ps 7, but contrast Ps 88), and the Psalter has been characterized as a movement from lament to praise. If this is somewhat of an exaggeration, it serves at least to emphasize the frequent expressions of trust which characterize the lament. In some cases it would seem as if the theme of trust has been lifted out to form a literary type all its own; cf. Ps 23, 62, 91. Among the communal laments can be counted Ps 74 and 79. They complain to the Lord about some national disaster, and try to motivate God to intervene in favor of the suffering people.

Other Psalms are clearly classified on account of content, and they may be in themselves laments or Psalms of thanksgiving. Among the “royal” Psalms that deal directly with the currently reigning king, are Ps 20, 21, and 72. Many of the royal Psalms were given a messianic interpretation by Christians. In Jewish tradition they were preserved, even after kingship had disappeared, because they were read in the light of the Davidic covenant reported in 2 Sm 7. Certain Psalms are called wisdom Psalms because they seem to betray the influence of the concerns of the ages (cf. Ps 37, 49), but there is no general agreement as to the number of these prayers. Somewhat related to the wisdom Psalms are the “torah” Psalms, in which the torah (instruction or law) of the Lord is glorified (Ps 1; 19:8–14; 119). Ps 78, 105, 106 can be considered as “historical” Psalms. Although the majority of the Psalms have a liturgical setting, there are certain prayers that may be termed “liturgies,” so clearly does their structure reflect a liturgical incident (e.g., Ps 15, 24).

Psalms are “a school of prayer.” They provide models to follow and inspire us to voice our own deepest feelings and aspirations.

Thanks for the cut and paste. I am a levite but ------do not have the voice for it

You are welcome. It's a most excellent summary. One I agree with wholeheartedly and would discuss with conviction at every opportunity because I believe in it.

you "believe" in 3000 year old hebrew poetry? Do you believe in LONGFELLOW?
How about Edgar Allen Poe? -----once upon a midnite dreary, while I pondered.......

 

[irosie91]

All I know is that 2000 years later Jews are still discussing Him.

who?

Who have you been discussing the last few posts?

2000 years later you are still discussing Jesus.

I am taking part in a messageboard that I access every day. I did not INTRODUCE
any particular individual. About whom would you like to converse?

So you are rationalizing why you are discussing Jesus 2000 years later? No one is holding a gun to your head. You are choosing to discuss Jesus.

you are being silly, ding-bat.----again. Who do you have in mind for
discussion? Saint ABU MAZEN?

I'm just making an observation. Apparently - given your comments - one that cause discomfort in you.

I am very comfortable. I told hubby that I need a LOW chair so that my short legs do not
dangle------and he GOT IT FOR ME. You want to talk to HIM? Every year I have to explain
what EASTER is all about-------unlike me, as a kid he never heard of some guy named "jesus"
so you can have a ONE-SIDED conversation with him. BUT he might refuse to talk about
Muhummad----even if that "object of conversation" interests you more. How about BEOWULF---
want to discuss BEOWULF?

I can tell you are very comfortable by the fact that you are still discussing Jesus 2000 years later.

I find it interesting that you quote one of David's Psalms----hubby would too---he reads
David INCESSANTLY and you still quote him-----3000 years later

The majority of Psalms were composed originally precisely for liturgical worship. They are songs of praise, in which a community is urged joyfully to sing out the praise of God and give thanks to God. Psalms can not be pigeon-holed into neat classifications. There are more Psalms of lament than of any other type. They may be individual (e.g., Ps 3–7; 22) or communal (e.g., Ps 44). Although they usually begin with a cry for help, they develop in various ways. The description of the distress is couched in the broad imagery typical of the Bible (one is in Sheol, the Pit, or is afflicted by enemies or wild beasts, etc.)—in such a way that one cannot pinpoint the exact nature of the psalmist’s plight. However, Ps 51 (cf. also Ps 130) seems to refer clearly to deliverance from sin. Several laments end on a note of certainty that the Lord has heard the prayer (cf. Ps 7, but contrast Ps 88), and the Psalter has been characterized as a movement from lament to praise. If this is somewhat of an exaggeration, it serves at least to emphasize the frequent expressions of trust which characterize the lament. In some cases it would seem as if the theme of trust has been lifted out to form a literary type all its own; cf. Ps 23, 62, 91. Among the communal laments can be counted Ps 74 and 79. They complain to the Lord about some national disaster, and try to motivate God to intervene in favor of the suffering people.

Other Psalms are clearly classified on account of content, and they may be in themselves laments or Psalms of thanksgiving. Among the “royal” Psalms that deal directly with the currently reigning king, are Ps 20, 21, and 72. Many of the royal Psalms were given a messianic interpretation by Christians. In Jewish tradition they were preserved, even after kingship had disappeared, because they were read in the light of the Davidic covenant reported in 2 Sm 7. Certain Psalms are called wisdom Psalms because they seem to betray the influence of the concerns of the ages (cf. Ps 37, 49), but there is no general agreement as to the number of these prayers. Somewhat related to the wisdom Psalms are the “torah” Psalms, in which the torah (instruction or law) of the Lord is glorified (Ps 1; 19:8–14; 119). Ps 78, 105, 106 can be considered as “historical” Psalms. Although the majority of the Psalms have a liturgical setting, there are certain prayers that may be termed “liturgies,” so clearly does their structure reflect a liturgical incident (e.g., Ps 15, 24).

Psalms are “a school of prayer.” They provide models to follow and inspire us to voice our own deepest feelings and aspirations.

Thanks for the cut and paste. I am a levite but ------do not have the voice for it

Do you know why Israel had prophets?

Of course-----so jewish children could have nice names over many generations

 

[ding]

All I know is that 2000 years later Jews are still discussing Him.

who?

Who have you been discussing the last few posts?

2000 years later you are still discussing Jesus.

I am taking part in a messageboard that I access every day. I did not INTRODUCE
any particular individual. About whom would you like to converse?

So you are rationalizing why you are discussing Jesus 2000 years later? No one is holding a gun to your head. You are choosing to discuss Jesus.

you are being silly, ding-bat.----again. Who do you have in mind for
discussion? Saint ABU MAZEN?

I'm just making an observation. Apparently - given your comments - one that cause discomfort in you.

I am very comfortable. I told hubby that I need a LOW chair so that my short legs do not
dangle------and he GOT IT FOR ME. You want to talk to HIM? Every year I have to explain
what EASTER is all about-------unlike me, as a kid he never heard of some guy named "jesus"
so you can have a ONE-SIDED conversation with him. BUT he might refuse to talk about
Muhummad----even if that "object of conversation" interests you more. How about BEOWULF---
want to discuss BEOWULF?

I can tell you are very comfortable by the fact that you are still discussing Jesus 2000 years later.

I find it interesting that you quote one of David's Psalms----hubby would too---he reads
David INCESSANTLY and you still quote him-----3000 years later

The majority of Psalms were composed originally precisely for liturgical worship. They are songs of praise, in which a community is urged joyfully to sing out the praise of God and give thanks to God. Psalms can not be pigeon-holed into neat classifications. There are more Psalms of lament than of any other type. They may be individual (e.g., Ps 3–7; 22) or communal (e.g., Ps 44). Although they usually begin with a cry for help, they develop in various ways. The description of the distress is couched in the broad imagery typical of the Bible (one is in Sheol, the Pit, or is afflicted by enemies or wild beasts, etc.)—in such a way that one cannot pinpoint the exact nature of the psalmist’s plight. However, Ps 51 (cf. also Ps 130) seems to refer clearly to deliverance from sin. Several laments end on a note of certainty that the Lord has heard the prayer (cf. Ps 7, but contrast Ps 88), and the Psalter has been characterized as a movement from lament to praise. If this is somewhat of an exaggeration, it serves at least to emphasize the frequent expressions of trust which characterize the lament. In some cases it would seem as if the theme of trust has been lifted out to form a literary type all its own; cf. Ps 23, 62, 91. Among the communal laments can be counted Ps 74 and 79. They complain to the Lord about some national disaster, and try to motivate God to intervene in favor of the suffering people.

Other Psalms are clearly classified on account of content, and they may be in themselves laments or Psalms of thanksgiving. Among the “royal” Psalms that deal directly with the currently reigning king, are Ps 20, 21, and 72. Many of the royal Psalms were given a messianic interpretation by Christians. In Jewish tradition they were preserved, even after kingship had disappeared, because they were read in the light of the Davidic covenant reported in 2 Sm 7. Certain Psalms are called wisdom Psalms because they seem to betray the influence of the concerns of the ages (cf. Ps 37, 49), but there is no general agreement as to the number of these prayers. Somewhat related to the wisdom Psalms are the “torah” Psalms, in which the torah (instruction or law) of the Lord is glorified (Ps 1; 19:8–14; 119). Ps 78, 105, 106 can be considered as “historical” Psalms. Although the majority of the Psalms have a liturgical setting, there are certain prayers that may be termed “liturgies,” so clearly does their structure reflect a liturgical incident (e.g., Ps 15, 24).

Psalms are “a school of prayer.” They provide models to follow and inspire us to voice our own deepest feelings and aspirations.

Thanks for the cut and paste. I am a levite but ------do not have the voice for it

You are welcome. It's a most excellent summary. One I agree with wholeheartedly and would discuss with conviction at every opportunity because I believe in it.

you "believe" in 3000 year old hebrew poetry? Do you believe in LONGFELLOW?
How about Edgar Allen Poe? -----once upon a midnite dreary, while I pondered.......

I think I already addressed this. Let me know if you need me to link to it.

 

[ding]

All I know is that 2000 years later Jews are still discussing Him.

who?

Who have you been discussing the last few posts?

2000 years later you are still discussing Jesus.

I am taking part in a messageboard that I access every day. I did not INTRODUCE
any particular individual. About whom would you like to converse?

So you are rationalizing why you are discussing Jesus 2000 years later? No one is holding a gun to your head. You are choosing to discuss Jesus.

you are being silly, ding-bat.----again. Who do you have in mind for
discussion? Saint ABU MAZEN?

I'm just making an observation. Apparently - given your comments - one that cause discomfort in you.

I am very comfortable. I told hubby that I need a LOW chair so that my short legs do not
dangle------and he GOT IT FOR ME. You want to talk to HIM? Every year I have to explain
what EASTER is all about-------unlike me, as a kid he never heard of some guy named "jesus"
so you can have a ONE-SIDED conversation with him. BUT he might refuse to talk about
Muhummad----even if that "object of conversation" interests you more. How about BEOWULF---
want to discuss BEOWULF?

I can tell you are very comfortable by the fact that you are still discussing Jesus 2000 years later.

I find it interesting that you quote one of David's Psalms----hubby would too---he reads
David INCESSANTLY and you still quote him-----3000 years later

The majority of Psalms were composed originally precisely for liturgical worship. They are songs of praise, in which a community is urged joyfully to sing out the praise of God and give thanks to God. Psalms can not be pigeon-holed into neat classifications. There are more Psalms of lament than of any other type. They may be individual (e.g., Ps 3–7; 22) or communal (e.g., Ps 44). Although they usually begin with a cry for help, they develop in various ways. The description of the distress is couched in the broad imagery typical of the Bible (one is in Sheol, the Pit, or is afflicted by enemies or wild beasts, etc.)—in such a way that one cannot pinpoint the exact nature of the psalmist’s plight. However, Ps 51 (cf. also Ps 130) seems to refer clearly to deliverance from sin. Several laments end on a note of certainty that the Lord has heard the prayer (cf. Ps 7, but contrast Ps 88), and the Psalter has been characterized as a movement from lament to praise. If this is somewhat of an exaggeration, it serves at least to emphasize the frequent expressions of trust which characterize the lament. In some cases it would seem as if the theme of trust has been lifted out to form a literary type all its own; cf. Ps 23, 62, 91. Among the communal laments can be counted Ps 74 and 79. They complain to the Lord about some national disaster, and try to motivate God to intervene in favor of the suffering people.

Other Psalms are clearly classified on account of content, and they may be in themselves laments or Psalms of thanksgiving. Among the “royal” Psalms that deal directly with the currently reigning king, are Ps 20, 21, and 72. Many of the royal Psalms were given a messianic interpretation by Christians. In Jewish tradition they were preserved, even after kingship had disappeared, because they were read in the light of the Davidic covenant reported in 2 Sm 7. Certain Psalms are called wisdom Psalms because they seem to betray the influence of the concerns of the ages (cf. Ps 37, 49), but there is no general agreement as to the number of these prayers. Somewhat related to the wisdom Psalms are the “torah” Psalms, in which the torah (instruction or law) of the Lord is glorified (Ps 1; 19:8–14; 119). Ps 78, 105, 106 can be considered as “historical” Psalms. Although the majority of the Psalms have a liturgical setting, there are certain prayers that may be termed “liturgies,” so clearly does their structure reflect a liturgical incident (e.g., Ps 15, 24).

Psalms are “a school of prayer.” They provide models to follow and inspire us to voice our own deepest feelings and aspirations.

Thanks for the cut and paste. I am a levite but ------do not have the voice for it

Do you know why Israel had prophets?

Of course-----so jewish children could have nice names over many generations

No. According to Maimonides (I assume you have heard of him) it's because like everything else certain people are endowed with talents and are called to instruct those that aren't. Makes sense to me. Does that make sense to you?

 

[irosie91]

All I know is that 2000 years later Jews are still discussing Him.

who?

Who have you been discussing the last few posts?

2000 years later you are still discussing Jesus.

I am taking part in a messageboard that I access every day. I did not INTRODUCE
any particular individual. About whom would you like to converse?

So you are rationalizing why you are discussing Jesus 2000 years later? No one is holding a gun to your head. You are choosing to discuss Jesus.

you are being silly, ding-bat.----again. Who do you have in mind for
discussion? Saint ABU MAZEN?

I'm just making an observation. Apparently - given your comments - one that cause discomfort in you.

I am very comfortable. I told hubby that I need a LOW chair so that my short legs do not
dangle------and he GOT IT FOR ME. You want to talk to HIM? Every year I have to explain
what EASTER is all about-------unlike me, as a kid he never heard of some guy named "jesus"
so you can have a ONE-SIDED conversation with him. BUT he might refuse to talk about
Muhummad----even if that "object of conversation" interests you more. How about BEOWULF---
want to discuss BEOWULF?

I can tell you are very comfortable by the fact that you are still discussing Jesus 2000 years later.

I find it interesting that you quote one of David's Psalms----hubby would too---he reads
David INCESSANTLY and you still quote him-----3000 years later

The majority of Psalms were composed originally precisely for liturgical worship. They are songs of praise, in which a community is urged joyfully to sing out the praise of God and give thanks to God. Psalms can not be pigeon-holed into neat classifications. There are more Psalms of lament than of any other type. They may be individual (e.g., Ps 3–7; 22) or communal (e.g., Ps 44). Although they usually begin with a cry for help, they develop in various ways. The description of the distress is couched in the broad imagery typical of the Bible (one is in Sheol, the Pit, or is afflicted by enemies or wild beasts, etc.)—in such a way that one cannot pinpoint the exact nature of the psalmist’s plight. However, Ps 51 (cf. also Ps 130) seems to refer clearly to deliverance from sin. Several laments end on a note of certainty that the Lord has heard the prayer (cf. Ps 7, but contrast Ps 88), and the Psalter has been characterized as a movement from lament to praise. If this is somewhat of an exaggeration, it serves at least to emphasize the frequent expressions of trust which characterize the lament. In some cases it would seem as if the theme of trust has been lifted out to form a literary type all its own; cf. Ps 23, 62, 91. Among the communal laments can be counted Ps 74 and 79. They complain to the Lord about some national disaster, and try to motivate God to intervene in favor of the suffering people.

Other Psalms are clearly classified on account of content, and they may be in themselves laments or Psalms of thanksgiving. Among the “royal” Psalms that deal directly with the currently reigning king, are Ps 20, 21, and 72. Many of the royal Psalms were given a messianic interpretation by Christians. In Jewish tradition they were preserved, even after kingship had disappeared, because they were read in the light of the Davidic covenant reported in 2 Sm 7. Certain Psalms are called wisdom Psalms because they seem to betray the influence of the concerns of the ages (cf. Ps 37, 49), but there is no general agreement as to the number of these prayers. Somewhat related to the wisdom Psalms are the “torah” Psalms, in which the torah (instruction or law) of the Lord is glorified (Ps 1; 19:8–14; 119). Ps 78, 105, 106 can be considered as “historical” Psalms. Although the majority of the Psalms have a liturgical setting, there are certain prayers that may be termed “liturgies,” so clearly does their structure reflect a liturgical incident (e.g., Ps 15, 24).

Psalms are “a school of prayer.” They provide models to follow and inspire us to voice our own deepest feelings and aspirations.

Thanks for the cut and paste. I am a levite but ------do not have the voice for it

Do you know why Israel had prophets?

Of course-----so jewish children could have nice names over many generations

No. According to Maimonides (I assume you have heard of him) it's because like everything else certain people are endowed with talents and are called to instruct those that aren't. Makes sense to me. Does that make sense to you?

Rambam did not get EVERYTHING right----nothing can be done---even by the
lucky talented---to improve my lousy singing voice. His grasp of medical care
was good-----for his time. He wrote (in rough translation) -- {more people die
from eating too much than too little} He also wrote----something like l be
careful what you write----some people believe anything written---IS TRUE]

 

[ding]

All I know is that 2000 years later Jews are still discussing Him.

who?

Who have you been discussing the last few posts?

2000 years later you are still discussing Jesus.

I am taking part in a messageboard that I access every day. I did not INTRODUCE
any particular individual. About whom would you like to converse?

So you are rationalizing why you are discussing Jesus 2000 years later? No one is holding a gun to your head. You are choosing to discuss Jesus.

you are being silly, ding-bat.----again. Who do you have in mind for
discussion? Saint ABU MAZEN?

I'm just making an observation. Apparently - given your comments - one that cause discomfort in you.

I am very comfortable. I told hubby that I need a LOW chair so that my short legs do not
dangle------and he GOT IT FOR ME. You want to talk to HIM? Every year I have to explain
what EASTER is all about-------unlike me, as a kid he never heard of some guy named "jesus"
so you can have a ONE-SIDED conversation with him. BUT he might refuse to talk about
Muhummad----even if that "object of conversation" interests you more. How about BEOWULF---
want to discuss BEOWULF?

I can tell you are very comfortable by the fact that you are still discussing Jesus 2000 years later.

I find it interesting that you quote one of David's Psalms----hubby would too---he reads
David INCESSANTLY and you still quote him-----3000 years later

The majority of Psalms were composed originally precisely for liturgical worship. They are songs of praise, in which a community is urged joyfully to sing out the praise of God and give thanks to God. Psalms can not be pigeon-holed into neat classifications. There are more Psalms of lament than of any other type. They may be individual (e.g., Ps 3–7; 22) or communal (e.g., Ps 44). Although they usually begin with a cry for help, they develop in various ways. The description of the distress is couched in the broad imagery typical of the Bible (one is in Sheol, the Pit, or is afflicted by enemies or wild beasts, etc.)—in such a way that one cannot pinpoint the exact nature of the psalmist’s plight. However, Ps 51 (cf. also Ps 130) seems to refer clearly to deliverance from sin. Several laments end on a note of certainty that the Lord has heard the prayer (cf. Ps 7, but contrast Ps 88), and the Psalter has been characterized as a movement from lament to praise. If this is somewhat of an exaggeration, it serves at least to emphasize the frequent expressions of trust which characterize the lament. In some cases it would seem as if the theme of trust has been lifted out to form a literary type all its own; cf. Ps 23, 62, 91. Among the communal laments can be counted Ps 74 and 79. They complain to the Lord about some national disaster, and try to motivate God to intervene in favor of the suffering people.

Other Psalms are clearly classified on account of content, and they may be in themselves laments or Psalms of thanksgiving. Among the “royal” Psalms that deal directly with the currently reigning king, are Ps 20, 21, and 72. Many of the royal Psalms were given a messianic interpretation by Christians. In Jewish tradition they were preserved, even after kingship had disappeared, because they were read in the light of the Davidic covenant reported in 2 Sm 7. Certain Psalms are called wisdom Psalms because they seem to betray the influence of the concerns of the ages (cf. Ps 37, 49), but there is no general agreement as to the number of these prayers. Somewhat related to the wisdom Psalms are the “torah” Psalms, in which the torah (instruction or law) of the Lord is glorified (Ps 1; 19:8–14; 119). Ps 78, 105, 106 can be considered as “historical” Psalms. Although the majority of the Psalms have a liturgical setting, there are certain prayers that may be termed “liturgies,” so clearly does their structure reflect a liturgical incident (e.g., Ps 15, 24).

Psalms are “a school of prayer.” They provide models to follow and inspire us to voice our own deepest feelings and aspirations.

Thanks for the cut and paste. I am a levite but ------do not have the voice for it

Do you know why Israel had prophets?

Of course-----so jewish children could have nice names over many generations

No. According to Maimonides (I assume you have heard of him) it's because like everything else certain people are endowed with talents and are called to instruct those that aren't. Makes sense to me. Does that make sense to you?

Rambam did not get EVERYTHING right----nothing can be done---even by the
lucky talented---to improve my lousy singing voice. His grasp of medical care
was good-----for his time. He wrote (in rough translation) -- {more people die
from eating too much than too little} He also wrote----something like l be
careful what you write----some people believe anything written---IS TRUE]

So you are arguing that knowledge is NOT handed down from people who are more knowledgeable to people who are less knowledgeable?

 

[hobelim]

Was there ever a doubt this fool couldn't keep up his charade?

lol, that's really funny coming from a person professes to believe that God can become edible just because you ask him to and believe....

Note to the living:

As Coroner I must aver, I have thoroughly examined him . And he's not only merely dead, he's really most sincerely dead.

 

[ding]

Was there ever a doubt this fool couldn't keep up his charade?

lol, that's really funny coming from a person professes to believe that God can become edible just because you ask him to and believe....

Note to the living:

As Coroner I must aver, I have thoroughly examined him . And he's not only merely dead, he's really most sincerely dead.

Me and one billion other Catholics.

What do you think Jesus was teaching about in the parable of The Early and Late Workers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16)?

 

[hobelim]

Was there ever a doubt this fool couldn't keep up his charade?

lol, that's really funny coming from a person professes to believe that God can become edible just because you ask him to and believe....

Note to the living:

As Coroner I must aver, I have thoroughly examined him . And he's not only merely dead, he's really most sincerely dead.

Me and one billion other Catholics.

What do you think Jesus was teaching about in the parable of The Early and Late Workers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16)?

Yes, you are all dead. That is the truth, the very truth. " All the fish in the sea are dead." It says so in the bible so I believe. lol...Not to mention that awful smell. Revolting actually.

Listen up.

Your professed beliefs have been extirpated. This can't be undone. Deal with it chump.

And forget about asking me questions already, enough with your bullshit. You can't hear me, your ears are truly sealed. You should rather ask yourself what Jesus meant by saying;

"Never again will I drink of the the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it, new, in the kingdom of God."

That being said... Watchers, (not you ding). Rev. 22:2

The fruit gives life and the leaves on the tree of life are for the healing of the nations, so, go out, give life, and heal.

First, tie up the tares up in bundles for burning (not literally) ; then gather the wheat into the barn.

 

[ding]

Was there ever a doubt this fool couldn't keep up his charade?

lol, that's really funny coming from a person professes to believe that God can become edible just because you ask him to and believe....

Note to the living:

As Coroner I must aver, I have thoroughly examined him . And he's not only merely dead, he's really most sincerely dead.

Me and one billion other Catholics.

What do you think Jesus was teaching about in the parable of The Early and Late Workers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16)?

Yes, you are all dead. That is the truth, the very truth.

Your professed beliefs have been extirpated. This can't be undone. Deal with it chump.

Forget about asking me questions, you can't hear me, your ears are truly sealed. You should rather ask yourself what Jesus meant by saying;

"Never again will I drink of the the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it, new, in the kingdom of God."

How did you get that from Matthew 20:1-16?

 

[ding]

Was there ever a doubt this fool couldn't keep up his charade?

lol, that's really funny coming from a person professes to believe that God can become edible just because you ask him to and believe....

Note to the living:

As Coroner I must aver, I have thoroughly examined him . And he's not only merely dead, he's really most sincerely dead.

Me and one billion other Catholics.

What do you think Jesus was teaching about in the parable of The Early and Late Workers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16)?

Yes, you are all dead. That is the truth, the very truth. " All the fish in the sea are dead." It says so in the bible so I believe. lol...Not to mention that awful smell. Revolting actually.

Listen up.

Your professed beliefs have been extirpated. This can't be undone. Deal with it chump.

And forget about asking me questions already, enough with your bullshit. You can't hear me, your ears are truly sealed. You should rather ask yourself what Jesus meant by saying;

"Never again will I drink of the the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it, new, in the kingdom of God."

That being said... Watchers, (not you ding). Rev. 22:2

The fruit gives life and the leaves on the tree of life are for the healing of the nations, so, go out, give life, and heal.

First, tie up the tares up in bundles for burning (not literally) ; then gather the wheat into the barn.

You edited your post 21 minutes after I replied?

Why not just reply to my post?

 

[ding]

Was there ever a doubt this fool couldn't keep up his charade?

lol, that's really funny coming from a person professes to believe that God can become edible just because you ask him to and believe....

Note to the living:

As Coroner I must aver, I have thoroughly examined him . And he's not only merely dead, he's really most sincerely dead.

Me and one billion other Catholics.

What do you think Jesus was teaching about in the parable of The Early and Late Workers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16)?

Yes, you are all dead. That is the truth, the very truth. " All the fish in the sea are dead." It says so in the bible so I believe. lol...Not to mention that awful smell. Revolting actually.

Listen up.

Your professed beliefs have been extirpated. This can't be undone. Deal with it chump.

And forget about asking me questions already, enough with your bullshit. You can't hear me, your ears are truly sealed. You should rather ask yourself what Jesus meant by saying;

"Never again will I drink of the the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it, new, in the kingdom of God."

That being said... Watchers, (not you ding). Rev. 22:2

The fruit gives life and the leaves on the tree of life are for the healing of the nations, so, go out, give life, and heal.

First, tie up the tares up in bundles for burning (not literally) ; then gather the wheat into the barn.

Here... let me help you. Walk me through it, ok?

The Workers in the Vineyard.*
1“The kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out at dawn to hire laborers for his vineyard.
2After agreeing with them for the usual daily wage, he sent them into his vineyard.
3Going out about nine o’clock, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4* and he said to them, ‘You too go into my vineyard, and I will give you what is just.’
5So they went off. [And] he went out again around noon, and around three o’clock, and did likewise.
6Going out about five o’clock, he found others standing around, and said to them, ‘Why do you stand here idle all day?’
7They answered, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You too go into my vineyard.’
8* a When it was evening the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Summon the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and ending with the first.’
9When those who had started about five o’clock came, each received the usual daily wage.
10So when the first came, they thought that they would receive more, but each of them also got the usual wage.
11And on receiving it they grumbled against the landowner,
12saying, ‘These last ones worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us, who bore the day’s burden and the heat.’
13He said to one of them in reply, ‘My friend, I am not cheating you.* Did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage?
14* Take what is yours and go. What if I wish to give this last one the same as you?
15[Or] am I not free to do as I wish with my own money? Are you envious because I am generous?’
16* Thus, the last will be first, and the first will be last.”