Should Christians fight against fallen angels.... not each other?

[Phantasman]

If you want me to read your Scriptures, quote Jesus. Just Jesus. Him, I will listen to. Paul? He's talking to Jews. I'm not a Jew.

Here's 2. Do you understand them? Hint: they're spiritual

(3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

(101) <Jesus said,> "Whoever does not hate his father and his mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me. And whoever does not love his father and his mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me.

 

[he-man]

I did ask God. He sent a dove that flew into my head and drove off the demon.

What Christ actually teaches is:
Love your neighbor as yourself and God over all.
That loving your neighbor MEANS doing unto others as you would have them do unto you, including FEEDING and CLOTHING the poor, HEALING the sick, CARING FOR the prisoner.
Also, that when we fall short in our loving, that is sin. For God to forgive us our sin, Christ teaches that we must ourselves forgive others who sin against us - that God will forgive us ONLY to the extent that we forgive others - that if we do NOT forgive others, then God does not forgive our sins either.
Jesus teaches that after we die, we proceed to Paradise or Gehenna, depending on our sins. If we have unforgiven sins, then we remain in Gehenna paying that debt of unforgiven sin UNTIL THE LAST PENNY IS PAID.
He teaches that at the end of the world, we will all be restored into bodies and individually come before God for final judgment. Those whose sins are forgiven will pass through the gates of the City of God, which will come down from the skies. Those with sins on the lists of the most condemnable sins will be thrown into the Lake of Fire for the second death. And others - an indeterminate set who do not enter the City nor have committed the deadly sins on the list and are unforgiven - will wail in outer darkness.

So, to get a good result at the end of life, LOVE and DO. And since you're going to sin, FORGIVE, and you will be forgiven.

That is what Christ actually teaches.

Christ also demonstrates that there are demons, that there is a devil, that there are angels. It is BECAUSE I have seen some of that, and experienced miracles, directly, that I realize that God is actually REAL, and that what Christ teaches is TRUE, and that the Christian teachings are not just another form of religious fable, like Odin and Zeus, and Islam and Bhuddism and Mystic Crystals, and all of the other nonsense.

You obviously come at this from a very different angle. Which is fine. What Christ taught, he taught. If you have not experienced the supernatural and yet believe in what Christ taught anyway - and you get what he taught RIGHT and focus on what HE actually taught - which was about DOING, not THINKING - then you're on the right track and carry on.

But don't try to teach others that things are not so that are so, just because you haven't seen them. Your world has no demons or angels in it, but the real world does. Be glad that you don't see them, or need to.

First, what Christ actually teaches us is to inform others by earnestly contending for the faith. The obstacles you need to overcome are the worldly teachings of idol demonology. It's said that Angels neither marry or are given in marriage and that we shall be like the Angels in heaven. Mark 12:25; They never die. So, there goes your fallen Angel theory. The other thing more importantly, is that we shall dwell on Earth and rule with him when he gets home here in Zion, to set up the new kingdom and then God will be all in all. Revelation 5:10; Revelation 20:6

 

[Phantasman]

I'm not anti-Pauline. I have no beef with Paul. My beef is with YOU. You want to teach me, to call me ignorant, to tell me what is so. You are failing miserably because you want to do it on YOUR terms, but your terms are insulting and they ignore what I am ready to listen to.

You quoted Jesus on the spirit. That's great. That's a start. I am full of his spirit. You're telling me I'm not - but I'm telling you what Jesus said - and I have so internalized it that I don't NEED to go running back to a book and quote lines verbatim. My paraphrase of Jesus is short, sweet, and completely accurate. It's not a hard gospel to understand.

You want to go squirrely and talk about Paul. It's useless.

If you have the spirit of God in you, and you can only talk about God using DIRECT quotes from the Bible, because that's your particular "thing", then go ahead and tell me what Jesus wants you and me to DO.

You've told me about the spirit. I speak from the spirit and I know it. You? I'm not hearing JESUS' spirit yet. I'm hearing yours, and seeing yours flitting around to find lines in the Bible that agree with what you have decided is true by thinking it out.

Lay out for me what Jesus wants me to do, using Jesus' words - Just Jesus.

If you do that, and you believe what you are saying, then you will discover that you and I are brothers in spirit and already are doing and believing the same thing, just expressing it differently.

Right now, I don't see that at all. I see a man, deep in his own reading and wisdom and learning, preaching at me, arrogantly. I don't sense love. I don't even sense Paul. I sense you.

So if you'd like, start over, and make your case with just Jesus.
If you really are with Jesus, then the spirit will make that obvious to both of us.

I am sorry if you don't detect love. I have so many other things I can be doing, yet am here debating. I didn't say you were ignorant. I said ignorance is the force against spiritual knowledge. It's not some little devil sitting on our shoulders telling us to lie, etc. It desires us to be like it, ignorant of the true God, the Father. Ignorance of the Father is the mother of ALL sin.

Ignorance makes us concern ourselves with flesh (over Spirit). It uses the flesh by the desires it gives it (to put fleshly self over others). The opposite of Christs second commandment of love. If we seek self (over others) we lie, cheat, steal, adulter and the others things that edifies ourselves by defaming others. Life is not of the flesh, but the Spirit. We seek death to gain the spirit, not save the flesh. It profits nothing.

There is nothing I can find in many non Canon books that aren't in the Gospel. But they do speak much against what the Jews were seeing (and why they didn't see God in Jesus).

Secret James says:
And I answered and said to him: "Lord, do not mention to us the cross and the death, for they are far from you."
The Lord answered and said: "Truly I say to you, none will be saved unless they believe in my cross. But those who have believed in my cross, theirs is the Kingdom of God. Therefore, become seekers for death, just as the dead who seek for life, for that which they seek is revealed to them. And what is there to concern them? When you turn yourselves towards death, it will make known to you election. In truth I say to you, none of those who are afraid of death will be saved. For the Kingdom of God belongs to those who have put themselves to death. Become better than I; make yourselves like the son of the Holy Spirit."

John:
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

A Christian neither fears death or allows to be used by the fear of it.

Spiritual understanding grows to the point we seek to be spiritual over flesh. We become the son of the true mother and father, the Spirit. We leave the parents of flesh, to be with the parents of spirit.

It is why, through scripture, I see the Holy Spirit as the mother. Patriarchy took the Aramaic "she" that Jesus spoke, and translated it to "he" in Latin. It is why I see that the Holy Spirit entered Jesus saying "this is my son". Jesus said we have never heard the Fathers voice.

Are we being misled? If so, by whom?

 

[GUANO]

What a slow way around to imply that there are no demons. It is a shame that people just cannot accept the plain and simple. The only demonology that exists is that which comes from the inside, not what exists in the outside world. Don't you think that people have enough sense to know that worldly things are the false gods that people serve. It does not matter if we are talking about 50 A.D. or 2017. The things of the world are emnity to God and we should all know that being friends with those who are more concerned with the world is against what God teaches. Try not to think so hard or try to impress me with Christian dogma next time you reply. First be sure that you are rid of the "fallen angel' theory and take on the armor of God that you may be able to withstand the "wiles" of this world and concentrate upon serving our God only.

I'm not implying that there are no demons and certainly not trying to impress you. I'm saying clearly that the definition of the word used by people today is invalid. The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Babylonians, etc., never thought of 'spirits' in the way that was popularized in the dark ages. Concentrate on serving God and walking in the light that you're given, however much or little that may be, that's all it takes, there is no requirement to have any type of knowledge of spiritual things. And if Christians did have such knowledge, they would be actively working against the powers of wickedness rather than embracing it—and it seems that is not what God wills of His people today. To be unaware of the real underlying evil, even within the christian organization, means you are free of liability because "you know not what you do", and in the end, it seems that God's will for our time is the overspreading of abominations.

In regards to "fallen angels", again, it all depends on how you define 'angels' and 'sons of God', are you using superstition or the scriptures themselves? The scriptures clearly say in multiple places "for those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God." Certainly these "children" can fall. As for the spirits, they are spirits and have no consciousness and can't rebel or do anything outside their nature, because they are part of nature.

Yes, the "demonology" exists within as "There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man." But that doesn't discredit demonology, it simply discredits superstition.

Even the superstition around demons and spirits has obvious influences over people because of their faith in them—does that make them less real? No, it makes them more real.

 

[he-man]

I'm not implying that there are no demons and certainly not trying to impress you. I'm saying clearly that the definition of the word used by people today is invalid. The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Babylonians, etc., never thought of 'spirits' in the way that was popularized in the dark ages. Concentrate on serving God and walking in the light that you're given, however much or little that may be, that's all it takes, there is no requirement to have any type of knowledge of spiritual things. And if Christians did have such knowledge, they would be actively working against the powers of wickedness rather than embracing it—and it seems that is not what God wills of His people today. To be unaware of the real underlying evil, even within the christian organization, means you are free of liability because "you know not what you do", and in the end, it seems that God's will for our time is the overspreading of abominations.
In regards to "fallen angels", again, it all depends on how you define 'angels' and 'sons of God', are you using superstition or the scriptures themselves? The scriptures clearly say in multiple places "for those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God." Certainly these "children" can fall. As for the spirits, they are spirits and have no consciousness and can't rebel or do anything outside their nature, because they are part of nature.
Yes, the "demonology" exists within as "There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man." But that doesn't discredit demonology, it simply discredits superstition.
Even the superstition around demons and spirits has obvious influences over people because of their faith in them—does that make them less real? No, it makes them more real.

Huh? If demons are Superstitions how can anyone have faith in them ? But I think what you are trying to say is that although demons are merely superstitions, poeple Just because they are ignorant of the facts, they still choose to believe that they exist, even though historical evidence and the Bible prove otherwise.It is simply amazing that in the 21st Century people do not believe in God but yet continue to accept the demonology of superstitious nations. Halloween included, along with the Easter Bunny, Santa, Festivals of the Dead, and Voodoo. It is a shameful thing to fall in to the hands of our God, who is a consuming fire, to those who worship idols of Diana and the like. The British Library has a current expose' of all the gods of nations who do such things. It shows the picture of a Budda symbol depicting the devil in the center and 233 other gods surrounding it.

 

[kjw47]

1. KJW, Let him who is without images / pictures / statutes in his or her home or wallet be the first one to cast the the first Stone. KJW, I just heard your STONE drop to the ground.

God, ordered Moses to erect a Bronze Serpent, so that the Jew who were bit can look upon it and be saved form its poison / venom. God is not against Statues or Pictures Images, what he hates is when one starts to worship them. Kjw, have you read the Bible? if you have you surely have not read Numbers 21:8,9. Below?

Numbers 21: 8And the Lord said to him: Make brazen serpent, (Graven image) and set it up for a sign: whosoever being struck shall look on it, shall live. 9Moses therefore made a brazen serpent, and set it up for a sign: which when they that were bitten looked upon, they were healed.

2. Matthew 23:9 you seem not to understand! What is the 4th commandment? Honor your What? the Answer is: Honor your Father and your Mother. Silly, if we cannot call anyone Father, then how can we obey the 4th Commandment, in order to Honor your FATHER! and Mother! (Oh you say spiritual Father) typical protestant! Where does Matthew 23: say anything the word "Spiritual"? NOWHRE!

What about the parable the Rich man and Lazarus, where the Lord said that the Poor man was in the bosom of Father Abraham? Luke 16:23And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom: 24And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame.

KJW, Luke 16:23,24 being stated, this shows that the man in hell understand more than you, that it is not a sin to call out to Father Abraham as Father Abraham. And More importantly Jesus Christ himself proves you wrong for He Used the Words Father Abraham in His Parable.

KJW, quoting your words: "Its very sad that anyone cannot see these realities". Realities are that the rich man in hell, by our Lords Own mouth, cries out the name of Father Abraham.

Know the truth!

Many deceived ones bow to a hand carved Jesus behind a pulpit---Jesus is a king of kings sitting on a throne in heaven. a hand carved image of him is a graven image, it co 0. Many kiss a little metal cross( icon) it can do 0.etc

 

[DennisTate]

I did ask God. He sent a dove that flew into my head and drove off the demon.

What Christ actually teaches is:
Love your neighbor as yourself and God over all.
That loving your neighbor MEANS doing unto others as you would have them do unto you, including FEEDING and CLOTHING the poor, HEALING the sick, CARING FOR the prisoner.
Also, that when we fall short in our loving, that is sin. For God to forgive us our sin, Christ teaches that we must ourselves forgive others who sin against us - that God will forgive us ONLY to the extent that we forgive others - that if we do NOT forgive others, then God does not forgive our sins either.
Jesus teaches that after we die, we proceed to Paradise or Gehenna, depending on our sins. If we have unforgiven sins, then we remain in Gehenna paying that debt of unforgiven sin UNTIL THE LAST PENNY IS PAID.
He teaches that at the end of the world, we will all be restored into bodies and individually come before God for final judgment. Those whose sins are forgiven will pass through the gates of the City of God, which will come down from the skies. Those with sins on the lists of the most condemnable sins will be thrown into the Lake of Fire for the second death. And others - an indeterminate set who do not enter the City nor have committed the deadly sins on the list and are unforgiven - will wail in outer darkness.

So, to get a good result at the end of life, LOVE and DO. And since you're going to sin, FORGIVE, and you will be forgiven.

That is what Christ actually teaches.

Christ also demonstrates that there are demons, that there is a devil, that there are angels. It is BECAUSE I have seen some of that, and experienced miracles, directly, that I realize that God is actually REAL, and that what Christ teaches is TRUE, and that the Christian teachings are not just another form of religious fable, like Odin and Zeus, and Islam and Bhuddism and Mystic Crystals, and all of the other nonsense.

You obviously come at this from a very different angle. Which is fine. What Christ taught, he taught. If you have not experienced the supernatural and yet believe in what Christ taught anyway - and you get what he taught RIGHT and focus on what HE actually taught - which was about DOING, not THINKING - then you're on the right track and carry on.

But don't try to teach others that things are not so that are so, just because you haven't seen them. Your world has no demons or angels in it, but the real world does. Be glad that you don't see them, or need to.

My old church the Worldwide Church of God had some pretty interesting theories on the White throne Judgment that combined the verses in Revelation with Ezekiel chapter 37 along with the statements about it being more tolerable in the judgment for Sodom and Gomorrah than for Capernaum.

I would like to think that I may have taken their ideas as a stepping stone and went one or two steps further:


The Philosophical implications of Multiverse Theory?

 

[GUANO]

Huh? If demons are Superstitions how can anyone have faith in them ? But I think what you are trying to say is that although demons are merely superstitions, poeple Just because they are ignorant of the facts, they still choose to believe that they exist, even though historical evidence and the Bible prove otherwise.It is simply amazing that in the 21st Century people do not believe in God but yet continue to accept the demonology of superstitious nations. Halloween included, along with the Easter Bunny, Santa, Festivals of the Dead, and Voodoo. It is a shameful thing to fall in to the hands of our God, who is a consuming fire, to those who worship idols of Diana and the like. The British Library has a current expose' of all the gods of nations who do such things. It shows the picture of a Budda symbol depicting the devil in the center and 233 other gods surrounding it.

A person can have faith in anything. Faith is very powerful and faith itself gives "life" to these 'things', it brings them up out of the abyss of the human imagination (so to speak).

The ancient gods themselves, such as the Egyptian, Sumerian, Babylonian, Hindu, etc., are depicted as "monsters" or other "creatures" in art and myth, but that is only allegory. They represent natural forces that exist in the real world and then are typified in the individual psyche and the body politic using symbolism. Most of the Assyrian and Babylonian gods directly represented the 'thing' itself... The word "Baal" simply means "Lord" or "Master", or more appropriately, it means "husband" (because the 'people' are the wife), and was just the patron deity of any specific thing. Before Baal it was "El", as in "El Shaddai" or "Elohim". The old testament makes many statements which grants recognition to other gods as if they exist.

The Egyptian Goddess "Ma'at" was just the word for the sky, deified. And there is a very complex cosmology that is also in agreement with Biblical Hebrew cosmology (which is much closer to Babylonian).

Where the Egyptians called it "Ma'at", and the Babylonians called it "Anu", it is written as the "firmament" in Genesis.

They did not practice Astrology, they practiced Astrolatry; which is the practice taking a deified principle such as a "King" or other ruler and assigning it to a natural phenomena such as the sky, stars, and the like, granting some kind of "legitimacy" to the ruling class and it's hierarchy. Only the common folk believed that the stars and other heavenly bodies were had actual influence over human affairs. It's magic/idolatry, and it's very advanced and complicated.

Satan is called the Prince of the Powers of the Air in one scripture. This is not the physical air, it's the symbolic air, the "mood", today we still call it the "atmosphere"...

Is there no such thing as "atmosphere" (mood)? Is there no such thing as "Satan?" If there is, what is 'it'? Satan is the "flesh"... The flesh determines what the pervading tone or mood of a place, situation, or work of art is, and the flesh is influenced by many other so-called 'powers', terrestrial or celestial (symbolically), and those powers are in a hierarchy. Demonology/cosmology is psychology. It always was. Just because people run wild and literalize the myths does not mean there is no meaning or reality to it. The myths and superstitions are powerful in themselves just as deception is powerful. But the Bible contains cosmology and says that these powers and 'authorities' are real, it just doesn't call the "Aer" (atmosphere) "Shu" (Egyptian), "Enlil" (Babylonian) or "Vata" (Hindu).

The Egyptian 'ruler' of darkness and chaos is "Kek" and it was a frog, in the Bible this force is called Leviathan—is this also superstition or is an actual thing and does it have some kind of symbolic 'ruler' who manifests itself on earth in strange ways?

SATUS MENTIBUS OBVIA = "Start Encountering Minds"

13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

So we are in agreement that there are no hollywood-style demons or ghosts or goblins, so then, is the Bible nonsense or does it actually mean something?

There is no such thing as dragons or beasts with seven heads and ten horns, and spirits cannot be seen so how can they look like frogs? And how can they perform miracles? Are dreams and visions completely meaningless or can they be interpreted? Are parables meaningless? Where is the line drawn?

 

[DennisTate]

A person can have faith in anything. Faith is very powerful and faith itself gives "life" to these 'things', it brings them up out of the abyss of the human imagination (so to speak).

The ancient gods themselves, such as the Egyptian, Sumerian, Babylonian, Hindu, etc., are depicted as "monsters" or other "creatures" in art and myth, but that is only allegory. They represent natural forces that exist in the real world and then are typified in the individual psyche and the body politic using symbolism. Most of the Assyrian and Babylonian gods directly represented the 'thing' itself... The word "Baal" simply means "Lord" or "Master", or more appropriately, it means "husband" (because the 'people' are the wife), and was just the patron deity of any specific thing. Before Baal it was "El", as in "El Shaddai" or "Elohim". The old testament makes many statements which grants recognition to other gods as if they exist.

The Egyptian Goddess "Ma'at" was just the word for the sky, deified. And there is a very complex cosmology that is also in agreement with Biblical Hebrew cosmology (which is much closer to Babylonian).

Where the Egyptians called it "Ma'at", and the Babylonians called it "Anu", it is written as the "firmament" in Genesis.

They did not practice Astrology, they practiced Astrolatry; which is the practice taking a deified principle such as a "King" or other ruler and assigning it to a natural phenomena such as the sky, stars, and the like, granting some kind of "legitimacy" to the ruling class and it's hierarchy. Only the common folk believed that the stars and other heavenly bodies were had actual influence over human affairs. It's magic/idolatry, and it's very advanced and complicated.

Satan is called the Prince of the Powers of the Air in one scripture. This is not the physical air, it's the symbolic air, the "mood", today we still call it the "atmosphere"...
View attachment 209844
Is there no such thing as "atmosphere" (mood)? Is there no such thing as "Satan?" If there is, what is 'it'? Satan is the "flesh"... The flesh determines what the pervading tone or mood of a place, situation, or work of art is, and the flesh is influenced by many other so-called 'powers', terrestrial or celestial (symbolically), and those powers are in a hierarchy. Demonology/cosmology is psychology. It always was. Just because people run wild and literalize the myths does not mean there is no meaning or reality to it. The myths and superstitions are powerful in themselves just as deception is powerful. But the Bible contains cosmology and says that these powers and 'authorities' are real, it just doesn't call the "Aer" (atmosphere) "Shu" (Egyptian), "Enlil" (Babylonian) or "Vata" (Hindu).

The Egyptian 'ruler' of darkness and chaos is "Kek" and it was a frog, in the Bible this force is called Leviathan—is this also superstition or is an actual thing and does it have some kind of symbolic 'ruler' who manifests itself on earth in strange ways?

SATUS MENTIBUS OBVIA = "Start Encountering Minds"

13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

So we are in agreement that there are no hollywood-style demons or ghosts or goblins, so then, is the Bible nonsense or does it actually mean something?

There is no such thing as dragons or beasts with seven heads and ten horns, and spirits cannot be seen so how can they look like frogs? And how can they perform miracles? Are dreams and visions completely meaningless or can they be interpreted? Are parables meaningless? Where is the line drawn?

In 1943 Dr. George Ritchie had a near death experience and saw what sure sounded like fifth, sixth, seventh, eight and I think nine dimensional space - time........ assuming the validity of String Theory.

www.CarbonBias.blogspot.ca/

"It was not until 1920 that the idea of linking electromagnetism and
gravity resurfaced. At that time a new theory of gravitation had been proposed by Albert Einstein (1879-1955), called the general theory of relativity. It was a replacement of Newton's theory, which had stood unchallenged since 1687. Inspired by Einstein's work, a young German mathematician named Theodore Kaluza was seized by a curious idea. The theory of relativity links space an time together to form a four-dimensional space-time continuum. What would happen, mused Kaluza, if general relativity were formulated in five rather than four dimensions? This is what Kaluza did, and to everyone's astonishment it was discovered that five-dimensional gravity obeys the same laws as
four-dimensional gravity as well as Maxwell's laws for the electromagnetic field. In other words, gravitation and electromagnetism are automatically unified in five dimensions, where electromagnetism is merely a component of gravity!"

The only drawback of the theory concerns the extra dimension. Why
don't we see it? An ingenious answer was provided by Oskar Klein. A
hosepipe viewed from afar looks like a wiggly line, i.e. one- dimensional.
However, on closer inspection it can be seen as a narrow tube. It is, in fact,
two-dimensional, and what was taken to be a point on the line is actually a
little circle going around the tube. In the same way, reasoned Klein, what we normally regard as a point in three dimensional space could in reality be a little circle going around a fourth space dimension. Thus Kaluza's extra
dimension might well exist, but be impossible to detect because it is closed
(circular) and rolled up to a very small circumference. In spite of
these bizarre overtones, it seems probable that in future a "theory of everything" will make use of the idea of unseen higher dimensions."
....

"Although nature manifests four distinct forces, physicists believe that
each may be part of a smaller number of more primitive forces. At high energy, the electromagnetic and weak forces appear to merge into a single "electroweak" force. Some "grand unified theories" suggest that a further amalgamation takes place between the electroweak and strong forces at as yet unattained energies. The most ambitious unification schemes envisage an amalgamation of all four forces into a single "superforce" at ultra-high levels of energy."...

"The real burden in the next three centuries will not be the development of fancy mathematics, but the experimental testing of these ambitious theories. All current thinking about total unification assumes that the effects of linking all the forces and particles together will only become manifest at energies that are some trillion times greater than those currently attainable in particle accelerators. Probably we shall never reach such energies directly" ( A Theory of Everything" Volume 21 of "The World of Science)

 

[he-man]

1. KJW, Let him who is without images / pictures / statutes in his or her home or wallet be the first one to cast the the first Stone. KJW, I just heard your STONE drop to the ground.

God, ordered Moses to erect a Bronze Serpent, so that the Jew who were bit can look upon it and be saved form its poison / venom. God is not against Statues or Pictures Images, what he hates is when one starts to worship them. Kjw, have you read the Bible? if you have you surely have not read Numbers 21:8,9. Below?

Numbers 21: 8And the Lord said to him: Make brazen serpent, (Graven image) and set it up for a sign: whosoever being struck shall look on it, shall live. 9Moses therefore made a brazen serpent, and set it up for a sign: which when they that were bitten looked upon, they were healed.

2. Matthew 23:9 you seem not to understand! What is the 4th commandment? Honor your What? the Answer is: Honor your Father and your Mother. Silly, if we cannot call anyone Father, then how can we obey the 4th Commandment, in order to Honor your FATHER! and Mother! (Oh you say spiritual Father) typical protestant! Where does Matthew 23: say anything the word "Spiritual"? NOWHRE!

What about the parable the Rich man and Lazarus, where the Lord said that the Poor man was in the bosom of Father Abraham? Luke 16:23And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom: 24And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame.

KJW, Luke 16:23,24 being stated, this shows that the man in hell understand more than you, that it is not a sin to call out to Father Abraham as Father Abraham. And More importantly Jesus Christ himself proves you wrong for He Used the Words Father Abraham in His Parable.

KJW, quoting your words: "Its very sad that anyone cannot see these realities". Realities are that the rich man in hell, by our Lords Own mouth, cries out the name of Father Abraham.

Know the truth!

Matthew 3:9 says not to call Abraham Father. Luke 16:24 was a reply a parable not a real occurance. The word Father should not be capitalized. It should be father for Abraham was the father of us all.

 

[Divide]

Does a predator need to repent what it does not feel guilty for doing?
Does a lion need to repent eating gazelles?
Does a spider repent eating flies?
Does a fish repent eating other fish?
Do we repent eating meat?
Does a cow repent eating the grass?

Do we repent eating, given that we think we have to eat?

No because they're animals.
Fallen angels and demons are not animals. They don't compare.

 

[JWO]

"For we wrestle not against FLESH AND BLOOD"

Matthew 23:29 Woe unto you, SCRIBES AND PHARISEES...
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets,
and wise men, and scribes:
and some of them ye shall kill and crucify;
and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues,
and persecute them from city to city:

 

[Divide]

Why would being a hybrid make one ineligible for redemption?

Consider that there were nephilim after the Flood also. The Anakim, whom the Israelites encountered in Canaan, and Azog the gigantesque king; even Goliath. Were these not post-flood descendants of human-angel unions, post flood Nephil? Were they not men, just like everybody else - as prone to sin and as prone to forgiveness.

Consider the Basques. They have weird blood, a weird language, are only partially interfertile with all other people because of their blood type. They don't seem to have "come from" anywhere. There is no record of their migrations, and they have no known relatives. Their own legendary history says that they came from the giants of the Mountains, who eventually went back up into the mountains (except for Olentzaro, who foretold for them the coming of Christ, and who is the "giant of Christmas" the Basques put up every year). Are the Basques not, perhaps, descendants of Nephilim, hybrids? And yet, are the Basques not men, and if they follow Jesus are they not eligible for the City of God, just like anybody else?

Why wouldn't they be?

Huh? Uhh...no. God had a plan and He created man, in His image...it did not include hybrid half angel half human beings. You have some pretty farout ideas there man. But what if the Nephilim follow Jesus? Really? Where did you come up with such an idea? There's no scripture saying anything of the sort. No, Nephilim are non repentant and unredeemable.

 

[Divide]

If you want me to read your Scriptures, quote Jesus. Just Jesus. Him, I will listen to. Paul? He's talking to Jews. I'm not a Jew.

Huh? What? Paul was the apostle raised up unto the Gentiles Brother. He does not speak to the Jews. That's the 12 disciples. Unless you are a Jew...then you are a gentile and Paul is speaking to you. That is all over scripture. Where are getting these ideas?

 

[JWO]

Huh? What? Paul was the apostle raised up unto the Gentiles Brother. He does not speak to the Jews. That's the 12 disciples. Unless you are a Jew...then you are a gentile and Paul is speaking to you. That is all over scripture. Where are getting these ideas?

Galatians 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

Acts 16:3 Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.

Nobody called Saul an apostle besides Saul himself.

 

[Divide]

Shadows is a good description. It is the age of the gray. Jesus was the light. Who would return to gray and leave the light?

The same spirit that caused the gray can influence the light if we go backward.

Gnosis tells us that it was Christ who caused Adam and Eve to eat. Was it the Tree of Life, or the Tree of Death? One said man would die. Another said man would gain knowledge. Who is truth?

The spirit was given to man to save him. Christ said it is the spirit that quickens us. Through the ignorance of the OT, came patriarchy, murderer, lies, adultery, jealousy, etc. Did this come from the soul or the spirit?

When Christ said that Moses didn't get his spiritual food from heaven, what are we to think? When he said that he was "from" heaven, who should we believe?

If the OT teaches anything, it reveals both influences. The life giver and the murderer. We know the murderer existed in the OT because Christ says so.

The only profit of the OT is to prove that Jesus kept the promise of "certain" truths the Jews were told. And through spiritual knowledge, we see the difference between the ignorance and the knowledge (spiritual).

Christ said teach the Gospel. That is not the OT. The church fathers taught it and became murderers as the Jews did. This is NOT Christs teaching (Gospel) and if one is not careful, the "liar and murderer" will corrupt the very Gospel Christ taught.

I don't need the OT. I am a Gentile as those Paul taught. And not influenced by the false gospel Paul spoke against in Galatians. 6 chapters worth reading that shows the emerging ideology of the Pharisee's that tried to use the Law to dispute spiritual truth from Christ, and that the early catholic ideology was dragged into.

Galatians 1:

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Paul mentions the Incident at Antioch, in which the Jews tried to incorporate their OT beliefs into the definition of Christianity. And accused Peter of bowing to such ignorance.

Galatians 2:
11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Paul continues in Galatians to refute the gospel the Jews proposed. Basically, including any part of the OT that was Judaism. Read Galatians with a spiritual open mind, and it reveals what was emerging, and how Paul tried to prevent it.

The church fathers wound up accepting the "other gospel", that redeclared the priesthood, something not found in the Gospels or Pauls 10 letters.

So you don't believe that the Bible is the Word of God. Uh, ok I guess. I do, so I guess we agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[Divide]

Dennis! Brother...We had a good thread going there for awhile and were tossing tings around very well... Now it's like the thread has been taken over with all sorts of strange ideas that sounds like stuff people made up.

If you want to do a one on one thread between us and continue along the lines we were talking, I'm game.

I can not continue to address a bunch of...gnostic (I guess) ideas. It's unprofitable and unfruitful.

 

[Vicomte13]

No because they're animals.
Fallen angels and demons are not animals. They don't compare.

Why don't they compare? Angels, humans and animals are all spirits. Humans and animals are souls, which is to say spirits breathing in flesh, while they live. When we die, we are simply spirits loosed of flesh, and of the same nature (if not status) as angels.

So why does it not apply?

 

[Vicomte13]

Huh? What? Paul was the apostle raised up unto the Gentiles Brother. He does not speak to the Jews. That's the 12 disciples. Unless you are a Jew...then you are a gentile and Paul is speaking to you. That is all over scripture. Where are getting these ideas?

Look, it's very straightforward. Jesus said very specific things, and because there are four gospels they are repeated over and over again, in triplicate or quadruplicate. What Jesus talked about was DOING things, and Jesus talked about HOW to be forgiven sin. Jesus is Lord. If somebody is going to preach at me, I am doing him a favor by telling him that I find Jesus persuasive, so preach at me using the words of Jesus. That is, after all, what I do. I use the words of Jesus to answer everything. Obviously that is where I place my treasure.

So, somebody wants to take the time to talk to me about God. That's good, that's fine. But then he wants to tell me I'm ignorant. That's not fine. I'm not ignorant. And then it's all Paul all the time.

That's not working for me. It's like somebody showing up at the door to talk about Jesus, and pulling out a Koran. Jesus is in the Koran. But I'm not interested in hearing Mohammed's opinion of Jesus. If we're going to take the time to talk about Jesus, I want Jesus to speak for himself. He does.

Instead of working with me on that matter and sticking to Jesus - I've already signalled my willingness to talk about him and what he said - my interlocutor becomes very arrogant and asserts that no, we will talk about Paul.

I've already said I'm not interested in talking about Paul until we've talked about Jesus. Jesus in light of Paul is ok, but Jesus first, and Jesus foremost.

Instead we get into more wrestling matches about Paul.

Which brings me to my conclusion. I worship and follow Jesus. These people worship and follow Paul.
If they worshiped and followed Jesus, it should be a VERY SIMPLE THING to respect the person they are trying to talk to and talk in the words that Jesus taught.

Truth is - THEY DON'T KNOW. They have paid so much attention to Paul that they have neglected Jesus. And then they try to justify this by making the two equal.

It's completely absurd, and it amounts to two different religions.

I've said many times I have no problems with Paul. I have big problems with people who pretend that Paul IS Jesus and that Jesus can be ignored and everything learned from Paul. That's a different religion from mine, and one that I am totally uninterested in wasting my time with.

The relentless insults that come from that direction are dull and predictable.

There's a reason that Catholics and Protestants don't get along, and this is the root of it.

 

[Vicomte13]

Here's 2. Do you understand them? Hint: they're spiritual

(101) <Jesus said,> "Whoever does not hate his father and his mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me. And whoever does not love his father and his mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me.

That's an interesting quote, because Jesus didn't say that. Whence the "as I do"? That's not in the text.

What Luke 14:26 actually says is:
"If anyone is coming to me and is not hating his father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, and still more his soul besides, he cannot be my disciple."

The Matthew 10:37 version is:
"He who is fond of father or mother above me is not worthy of me. And he who is fond of son or daughter above me is not worthy of me."

Matthew's version of Jesus is easier to take in this regard than Luke's. Matthew's Jesus, taken literally, is a completely acceptable thing. Love God above all - right. That would mean love God more than family.

Luke's version of Jesus is quite a bit harder to take: HATE my father and mother? HATE me wife? HATE my child?

No, Jesus, I will not do that. If you meant that literally, then I cannot follow you, because I will not hate my parents, nor will I hate my wife, nor will I hate my child.

Jesus, if you really meant that, then you are all over the place and inconsistent with yourself, for elsewhere you said to love your neighbor as yourself, and love God above all.

Love God above all? Of course. Did not God give me my parents, and my child too?
But follow Jesus to the point of HATING my parents, wife and child?
No.

Not call my own father "father"? No. That's just silly.

So, there are two examples of things that Jesus said that, if he meant them literally, are outrageous or just foolish, and that I'm not going to accept or do.

I assume, given the preposterousness of a commandment to hate one's own family, or the ridiculousness of the commandment not to call one's own biological father "father", that Jesus used those terms in those preposterous and ridiculous ways as hyperbole, to grab our attention and force us to think about what he's getting at.

Indeed, that's really the only way that those two expressions of Jesus are acceptable at all: as hyperbole. What he is recorded by Matthew is, I take it, the MEANING of his hyperbolic "hate everybody you love". "Don't give undue authority to some spiritual leader" is what I take he meant by "call no man father"; also, remember that you and your father both are spirits created by the Father in heaven, making you both brothers of Jesus by the spirit, if you follow Jesus.

If he actually meant to be taken literally, then I'll take him literally also, and not call anybody the Greek word "father" that he used. Since I call my father the English word "father", I'm not breaking what he literally said.

If he really MEANT that I'm supposed to hate my parents, my wife and my child or I can't be his disciple, then he can go fly a kite, because I won't be anybody's disciple on those terms. They are unacceptable.

My God doesn't ask me to hate my loved ones. He asks me to love everybody, and to love Him even more. That's what I've decided Jesus MEANT by that phrase you misquoted (you added the "like I do" to it).